STRUCTURAL CHANGE IN GAMBIAN AGRICULTURE:

-STAGNATION OR SILENT TRANSFORMATION?

Philip J. OeCosse

6 October 1992 Banjul, The Gambia

This paper was prepared under Purchase Order No. 635-00-0-02-0160, dated September 2, 1992, with the United States Agency for International Development (USAID/Banjul). USAID/Banjul does not accept responsibility for the views expressed herein, which are those of the author and should not be attributed to USAID/Banjul. to

a

of

is

fruit

paper Bonnie

Elon

the rigorous work

impetus

the

the

of

is

ideas,

paper.

more

Their

of

conditions.

staff

efforts

the

paper

of

store field

them.

hopes)

this

administrative

difficult

whose

and

with

the

content author

.

sense,

copious

often

a

room

gave

without

of and

(the

In

and

to

face

employment

people

chat

concept

computer

the

dialogue,

in

two

the

the remarkable

Agriculture.

to

policy

his

cocktail

of even

rewarding

both

thank

due

Acknowledgements

to

idle

and

From is

Ministry

from

encourage

specially

joyous

the

to

to

feedback

here

perseverance,

of

gratitude

in

of

completed.

and

wishes

years

debt essential

been

Planning

disp~sition

a

expressed

three

of

author

her

have

dedication

in

ideas

provided

Finally, The

not of

the

author's

would Gilbert Pounds, Department the model turn logic. Table of Contents

I. Introduction...... - 1 _

II. Structural Changes...... - 2 - A. Exogenous Changes ...... " - 2 - 8. Stagnation? ...... "...... - 4 - o Cultivat.ed and Available Farmland ...... - 4 - o. Yield per Hectare of Cereals and Groundnuts ...... - 8 - o Agricultural Employment and Demographics ...... - 9 - C. Or SilenfTransformation? ...... - 11 - o Animal Traction and Productivity ...... - 11 - o Crop Mix ...... - 13 - o Non-Farm Employment: As Important As Farming? ...... - 14 -

III. Discussion ...... - 15 - A. Rethinking Farming Strategy in The Gambia ...... - 15 - 8. Land Availability ...... - 17 - C. Regional Differences in Gambian Farming Systems ...... - 17 -

IV. Conclusions and Policy Implications ...... - 19 - A. The Role of Agriculture in The Gambian Economy ...... - 19 - B. The Role of Government and Donors in Agricuhure ...... - 20 - C. Imported Rice and Structural Change ...... - 21 - D. The Response to Macro-Policy Changes ...... - 22 - E. The Changing Role of Women in Agriculture ...... - 22 - F. Agriculture and Natural Resource Conservation ...... - 23 - G. Appropriate Indicators for Measuring Change ...... - 23 -

V. Directions for Future Research and Analysis ...... "...... - 23 -

VI. The Future of Gambian Farming? ...... - 24 -

Statistical Annex ...•...... - 25 -

References •.•...... - 26 -

Endnotes ...... - 30 -

- i - List of Tables

Table 1: Land Use and Availability for Upland Crops •.•...... •..•.. . . •. - 5 - Table 2: Proportion of Cultivated Upland Taken from Fallow, 1990 ••.•..... - 7 - Table 3: Agricultural and Non-Agricultural Population Growth Rates, 1973-90 . - 10 -

List of Figures

Figure 1: Select Components of Gross Domestic Product (GOP), 1975-91 •...• - 3 - Figure 2: Cultivated Area and Population, 1974-91 ...••••.•.••....•••.. - 4 - Figure 3: Cultivated Upland Area by Division, 1974-91 ••..•.••.•.•••..•• - 4 - Figure 4: Land Use and Availability for Upland Crops •..•..•...•.•.•.•••. - 6 - Figure 5: Yields of Major Crop Groups, 1974-91 .•••...... •••...•...•• - 8 - Figure 6: Equine and Agricultural Population, 1974 and 1991 ....•..••...• - 12 - Figure 7: Rural Income Sources, 1972 and 1989 . • . . • . • • . . • • . • . . • . • . .. - 15 - Figure 8: Area Cultivated and Agricultural Population, by Division ....•••. . . - 18 -

- ii - _ .'

I. Introduction

Agriculture has been the recipient of copious donor and Government resources in The Gambia in recent decades. In each of 1988 and 1990, for example, direct donor assistance to the sector totalled over $10 million, or about 20 percent of agricultural Gross Domestic Product iGDP) and five times the Government's annual recurrent budget.' This level of investment notwithstanding, both Government and donors feel that agriculture has not performed as it should have. A recent assessment of poverty in The Gambia carries the prevalent tone: "The performance of the agriculture sector has been disappointing for most of the past decade" (Ahmed et. al. 1991: 16).

The malaise in the sector is often diagnosed in policy documents as "stagnancy."2 To justify their diagnosis, pundits point to a set of facts: yields per hectare of major crops have not changed; neither cultivated area nor production have increased significantly; and, young men and women flee the farm as soon as they reach an employable age. Simply . - put, the same number of farmers are cultivating the same amount of land and getting the . same output. Hence, stagnation.

Two stories might be told to explain the stagnancy: Policy documents commonly argue that farmers' sincere efforts to increase production are constrained by a lack of technologies, limited access to credit, deteriorating soil productivity and a shrinking amount of available farmland. 3 Given this focus, generation of new technologies, pump priming with credit or the subsidization and distribution of cheap fertilizer are all possible solutions. The goal of resolving these constraints is to boost yields per hectare of traditional crops so as to allow for a greater degree of food self-sufficiency, to stem the outmigration of young people from agriculture, and more generally to turn the agricultural

sector into a growth. ~r~aof ~heeconomy.

But the same 'facts' of stagnation can be woven into a tale with a different emphasis. Farming, it might be said, has become an increasingly risky business. The Government is no longer providing the help it once did. Less rain falling over fewer days has added another obstacle. Using new time-saving animal traction technologies, rural households have realized they can do the same work in less time and thus release labor for . work elsewhere. The rapid growth of job opportunities outside agriculture has helped ·provide farmers with a greater number of income sources, thereby reducing the risk from . another drought. Given the new external conditions, farmers' keenest interest has become the production of the same amount of food and the release of the family's labor force to pursue opportunities elsewhere.

It is this second story that is told below. Rather than accepting that the agriculture . sector has been stagnant in recent decades, the paper argues that a silent transformation .. has occurred which has been best captured in the rapid growth of animal traction and labor productivity. After reviewing the three areas where stagnation is purported to have

occurred, the p~perturns to the salient compor,lents of agriculture's silent transformation. Implications are considered for farm household strategy, the land frontier question, and regional differences in Gambian farming systems. The paper closes with conclusions and

- 1 - _ policy implications, including implications for the role of Government and donors in the sector, as we" as some thoughts about the future of Gambian agriculture.

II. Structural Changes

A. Exogenous Changes

For the purposes of assessing the macroeconomic and policy environment for agriculture, the period from the mid-1970's through to the present can be divided into the periods before and after the launching of the Economic Recovery Programme (ERP) in June 1985.4 The pre-ERP period was characterized by strong Government institutions and intervention in the sector, of which the Gambia Produce Marketing Board (GPMB), the Gambia Cooperative Union (GCU), and controlled agricultural prices are but a few examples. Although farmers received only a fraction of the world groundnut price, real price was more or less stable. Towards the end of the period, the Government became increasingly indebted and unable to support its agricultural institutions. An overvalued exchange rate made the prospect of increasing exports unlikely.

Rainfall in the period declined while shifting from a unimodal to a bimodal pattern. In the collective memory, the Feast of St. Mary's during the 1960's and early 1970's was bound to be one of rainfall from dawn to dusk. Yet with time, the likelihood of a dry spell in August increased, threatening crops during the reproductive phase. Between the two decades 1965-75 and 1976-85 average annual rainfall fell in Yundum from 1,049 to 870 millimeters, in Georgetown from 843 to 708 millimeters, and in Basse from 919 to 822 millimeters (Wright, 1988). For farmers, rainfall changes led on upland soils to a limited soil recharge and therefore a shorter potential growing season and on lowland soils to lower fresh water run-off into rice fields.

In response to these and a host of other problems, the Government launched the Economic Recovery Programme. With the beginning of the ERP, the Dalasi returned to market value, effectively devaluing it. Progressive dismantling of agricultural sector institutions, including the GPMB, the GCU and the Ministry of Agriculture, made it clear that farmers would have to fend for themselves. Although the groundnut price offered to farmers in 1986 was high, the following year and years since have seen significantly lower prices. While the Government was committed to get out of input marketing, there has . been limited response from the private sector, especially in the import and distribution of fertilizer, which Gambian farmers had come to expect at subsidized prices in the late 1970's and early 1980's. The President continues to reiterate that Government can no longer be the provider it once was. More than ever, farmers believe it.

The composition of Gross Domestic Product has changed in a few major respects since the early 1970's. Most notable is the expansion of the services sector (excluding

2 Figure 1: Select Components of Gross Oomestic Product (GOP), 1975-91

60 Percentage of CDP

50

40

30

20

10

075 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91

- Crop Production -+- Services wI 0 GI n --*- Reexports

groundnut trade) and a decline in crop production. As shown in Figure 1, crop production began the period from 1975-91 at 26 percent of GOP and closed the period at less than 15 percent. The service sector, excluding groundnut trade, began the period at 38 percent of GOP and ended the period at over 50 percent. Growth in the services sector was in large part a function of the reexport trade. The reexport trade expanded rapidly in the 1970s as The Gambia maintained its open trade policy while neighboring countries resorted to high tariffs and quotas. Reexports, which was less than one percent of GOP in 1975, surpassed 25 percent of GOP in 1984 and 30 percent of GOP in 1991.

In addition to the reexport trade, an important boost to the economy has come from foreign aid. Although foreign aid has not been carefully tracked until relatively recently, and indeed is difficult to track at all, it is argued to have played an important role in the improving economic situation since the ERP (McPherson and Radelet 1987). External assistance in the forms of grants and loans has been the equivalent of no less than 18 percent of GOP in any year since 1983, and rose to 42 percent of GOP in 1987.5 According to data from the UNOP for 1990 (UNOP 1991), donor assistance to The Gambia totalled over $100 per person.

- 3- B. Stagnation?

In this section, the three assumptions of stagnation are reviewed in turn. The assessment of cultivated area is broadened to include not just cultivated, but also available farmland, while the assessment of agricultural employment is looked at in the broader context of rural demographics. Figure 2: Cultivated Area and Population, 1974-91

210 Hlel" .. 1'0001 Popul.lio. 1'0001 700 120 H,el ... , 1'0001 200 .•••.••••••••••••••

190

500

~SO

~OO

350 15014 7S 76 II 71 79 10 II BZ Il I~as 16 17 II 8! 90 91 ~~~~7S~76~1l~7~'~7~9~'0~'1~8~Z~8~l~I~~B5~1~6~1~7~BB~I~I-'~OJ91 Yellr Year

...... "II C,ops -+- "9,ieullu,.1 Pop. - Co.", 0,.,., -+- Aiel --O,o.. d.vl

5'''(1; MASS 14·11 Ilame (II) IlIIme Ib)

Figure 3: Cultivated Upland Area by Division, 1974-91

60 H.Cllles 1'0001 &Or-H';.;,C;.;,I.'...;.U;.,.:I...;.·OO;.;,O.;,.I______--,

20 ......

10 ......

~~~~7~S~7&~n~1I~79~10~11~8~2~.~l~8~4~.~5~8&~.7~81~89-9~0~91014 )5 7& II 11 )I 80 '1 12 8l 8~IS 1& 11 81 19 10 91

-Wt'111I ...... lOwe' AI", -Upper AI.. , -+- Ho'lb But -4- .~.CCIII"Illud

"",0: NAil ,.... IllIme Ill) lIame (b)

o Cultivated and Available Farmland

A comparison of cultivated and available farmland allows an assessment of whether the area under cultivation has stagnated. Figure 2 shows the national hectarage under coarse grains, groundnuts, rice and all crops as well as the agricultural population for the -4- per~od1974-91. Although the cultivated area under all crops varies widely during the penod, there appears to be an upward trend. The annual increase in hectarage over the period was estimated at 1,700 hectares per year, or one percent of average cultivated s area. This one percent rate of growth, although statistically significant, is economically insignificant when compared to a rate of population growth -of 3.4 percent and a GOP growth of over 3 percent. The national figures for cultivated area hide significant variation by Division. As shown in frame (a) of Figure 3, cultivated upland area in the Western and Lower River Divisions have certainly stagnated, and may even have decline. Much of the growth in area cultivated over the past 18 years has come from the North Bank and MacCarthy Island Divisions, as shown in frame (b) of Figure 3. No such similar increase can be observed for the Western, Lower River, and Upper River Divisions, which have fluctuated through the period, but shown no remarkable and consistent upward or downward movements.

Table 1: Land Use and Availability for Upland Crops

A B C D E F

Total Area Suitable for Cultivated Upland 86-91 Upland Currantly Under (He) Upland Ferming (includes fellow) Cultivetion (He) Averege (He) As a Percent Estimete As a Percent of Suiteble (Ha) of Suiteble Uplend (1.25"C) Upland

-Western 174,755 55,539 25,276 48 31,857 57

-North Bank 221,011 80,847 45,065 58 56,593 70

-Lower River 154,058 28,491 14,074 49 17,664 62

-MID-North 147,575 30,274 23,190 77 29,063 96

-MID-South 142,140 22,013 24,186 110 30,158 137

-Upper River 106,974 39,400 38,657 98 48,462 123

THE GAMBIA I 946,513 230,386 I 170,448 74 211,955 92

Source: Dunsmore et.al (1976). for columns A and B. NASS 86-90 for column C. Some policy makers argue that increases in cultivated area are a fraction of what they would have been if suitable land had been available for farming. Farmers have emigrated, the logic goes, because there is no land for them to work. To take a closer "look at availability question, land use data from Dunsmore et. al. (1976) was used to compare what is suitable for farming with what is actually used for farming.7 Since the amounts of available lowland areas have changed over time due to salinization and other climactic changes, we focus here only upon suitable upland. Since some fallowing normally occurs, a conservative 25 percent8 is added to the cultivated area to arrive in Column E at an estimate of the upland area currently under farming. Results are presented in tabular form in Table 1 and graphically in Figure 4.

As shown clearly in the Figure, it is in the western Divisions of The Gambia where the suitable upland significantly exceeds the land which is under farming. These results are most surprising for the North Bank, where conventional wisdom has it that land is

- 5.- .. Figure 4: Land Use and Availability for Upland Crops

100 ('000) Hectares

80

60

40

20

o Western North Bank Lower River MD-North MID-South Upper River

_ Cultivated ~Iand!721 ~Iand Under Farmng amSUitable Upland

Source: Table 1

running out as continuous cultivation increases. Notwithstanding the Western Division's loss of upland to fenced areas for horticulture, there still appears to be an abundance of available land for farming - over 40 percent according to the calculations here.

The land pressure situation in the eastern half of The Gambia contrasts with that of . the west. According to .the data for the Upper River and MID-South divisions, the land frontier has been reached or surpassed. Land pressure is the worst in MID-South, where the farmed upland area exceeds suitable upland by 37 percent. In both MID-North and Upper River Divisions, the upland under farming exceeds the suitable lands available, indicating land pressure. At least for MID-North, this aggregate picture of land pressure is confirmed in regional surveys (see Mills and Gilbert 1990).

Fallow rates and land clearing give another indication of land availability and pressure. Although a time series of fallow rate estimates are not available for recent decades, it is generally agreed that rates are declining (see GOTG (1992) and Jabara (1990: 14)). NASS data show that only 16 percent of the North Bank's cultivated upland in 1990 was taken from fallow, thus confirming the suspicion that fallow levels are low in that region. Aside from the Upper River Division, where the figure was 17 percent, the proportion of cultivated land taken from fallow exceeded 30 percent of cultivated area in

- 6 - Table 2: Proportion of Cultivated Upland Taken from Fallow, 1990

A B C

Cultivated Taken from Proponion from Upland '90 fallow '90 Fallow IB/A" 1001

-Western 19,867 9,658 49

-North Bank 50,093 8,031 18

-Lower River 11,354 3,445 30

-MID-North 21,813 6,807 31

-MID-South 23,207 8,617 37

-Upper Rivar 41,138 7,011 17

THE GAMBIA 167,472 43,569 26

Source: NASS 90 all the other Divisions. _The complete set of fallow data is shown in Table 2. Only two percent of cultivated groundnut area had been newly cleared in 1989, while the figure was just one percent for early millet, providing evidence that slash and burn clearing of virgin lands is uncommon at present.

One historic fact supports the assertion that suitable land is still available for farming in select regions of The Gambia. Although the data presented here for total cultivated area shows a slow increase over time, it is worthy of note that data collection began at the time of, and as a partial result of, the drought. There is reason to believe that cultivated area in the decades before the drought significantly exceeded the cultivated area today. Certainly, the 122.9 thousand tons of ground nuts marketed on average in the period 1966-75 greatly exceeded that of the period 1976-85 (88.5 thousand tons) and 1986-89 (51.3 thousand tons) (McPherson and Posner 1.991: 2). Even though many these groundnuts were once imported from Senegal, is hard to imagine that total cultivated area could have been any less than today.

From the preceding results, the following can be concluded: (1) that the national levels of cultivated farmland in The Gambia have increased marginally in recent decades; (2) that the area cultivated in North Bank and MID have increased over the period, and especially since the mid-1980's; (3) that in the western half of The Gambia, suitable farmland is available, but goes unfarmed; and (4) in the eastern half of The Gambia, significant pressure on available farmland appears to be occurring.

The results for the North Bank are puzzling, and need to be explained if the structural change in the sector is to be understood. Why is it that farmers there practice continuous cultivation even while suitable fallow land is available for farming? A similar conundrum presents itself for the Western and Lower River Divisions. Why is it that in the two Divisions with the largest portion of available farmland, cultivated area has increased the least? In order to answer these questions, it is necessary to consider how yields and employment have changed allow with changes in area, cultivated.

- 7 - _ Figure 5: Yields of Major Crop Groups, 1974-91

('000) Kilos per hectare 160or------______~ 1400

1200

1000

800 600

400

200 a Coarse Grains Goundnuts Rice

_ 1974-78 Iill::l 1979 - 82 mm1983 - 86 ~ 1987-91

Source: NtlSS 74-91

o Yield per Hectare of Cerea~s~nd Groundnuts

Yields per hectare of the major crop groups are shown in Figure 5 for the period from 1974-91. Groundnut and rice yields appear to be stagnant over the period, and may even be declining. Coarse grain yields appear to have risen slightly over the period, and then fallen slightly in the past five years. Although these multi-year groupings hide a considerable amount of year to year variation in yields, there has been little evidence of the kind of yield increases of which these crops are biologically capable.

While the stagnancy in traditional crop yields seems to leave The Gambia far from the "green revolution" yield increases experienced in Asia, The Gambia's stagnancy has occurred even in spite of. the wholesale acceptance and use of chemical fertilizer. Fertilizer use rose from 3,573 tons per year during 1973-75 to 11,057 tons per year during 1979- 81 and then down to 7,189 tons in 1987-89. Subsidized by the Government and distributed for many years by the Gambia Cooperative Union; fertilizer has become widely used and accepted in The Gambia compared to other Sahelian countries. Mills (1990: 49) references an estimate by Mcintyre (1985) of fertilizer use of 16.43 kg/ha in the period 1978-82, the third highest rate in sub-Saharan Africa at the time. In 1990, according to

- 8 - NASS data, 39 percent of coarse grain area and 15 percent of ground nut area had been fertilized.

The rise in fertilizer price and decline in use is one likely cause of the yield decrease for each of coarse grains, ground nuts and rice in the period 1987-91. With the progressive disengagement of GCU from fertilizer distribution and the continued return of fertilizer price to market levels, application of fertilizer has declined. NASS data shows that between 1990 and 1991, fertilizer use dropped from 39 to 36 percent of coarse grain area and from 15 to 11 percent of groundnut area. Decline in fertilizer use was more precipitous in the past year in selected regions, especially MID-North, where fertilizer use on coarse grain fields drop from 44 to 17 percent of farmed area and on groundnut fields from 18 to 6 percent of farmed area.

In contrast to the yield levels per hectare are those per farmer. Before turning to labor productivity, however, it is necessary to examine the number of laborers in the sector and, more generally, demographic changes in the rural areas.

o Agricultural Employment and Demographics

Those familiar with the rural areas of The Gambia know that farms in many villages seem to be becoming more retirement home and day care center rather than active farming enterprise. Villages, especially in the western parts of the country, seem to be increasingly filled with old people and children .. Evidence from Foiii Brefet shows that the male population between 15 and 49 declined by 4.9 percent per year between 1983 and 1990, while that 15-49 year-old women declined by 1.8 percent per year (Thoma and Jaiteh 1991: 25). Evidence from Central Baddibu (Posner and Gilbert 1987a) and Foiii Bintang-Karenai (Posner and Gilbert 1987b) tell a similar story.

For a more careful look at agricultural employment, and more generally demographic changes in the rural sector since the early 1970's, Population Census data from 1973 and 1983 and NASS data for 1990 are used. By assessing changes in agricultural population in light of other structural changes in the sector, it is possible to dra'A! some tentative conclusions about changes in the levels of agricultural employment in recent decades. Population growth rates are shown for the period in Table 3 while actual population estimates are included in the Statistical Annex, 'Table A 1.9

While The Gambia'S population grew at 3.4 percent annually between the Census years of 1973 and 1983, growth rates between regions and population cohorts show . considerable variation. The most striking result of Table 3 is that population growth was the ·slowest in the most important farming areas of the country. Working age population in the North Bank Division grew by less than one percent annually since 1973, while that of MID-N grew by 1.2 percent in 1973-83 and 0.0 percent in 1983-90. Working age population growth rates in Lower River division, where suitable upland is apparently available for farming, rose only by 1.2 percent per year in 1973·83 to 2.0 percent per year in 1983·90. In all six Divisions, working age agricultural population grew more slowly than total population, confirming the suspicion that there seem to be an increasing proportion of children and elders on the farm.

·9· .,

Table 3: Agricultural and Non-Agricultural Population Growth Rates , 1973 -90

Annual % Change 73-83 Annuel % Change 83-90 POPULATION GROUP AND DIVISION 15-64 I Total 15-64' I Total -Western 3.3 3.4 5.8 5.9

-North Bank 0.2 1.0 0.8 0.7

-Lower River 1.2 2.1 2.0 2.S

-MID-North 1.2 1.8 0.0 0.8

-MID-South 1.6 2.2 1.7 2.7

-Upper River 1.7 2.4 4.5 4.7

AGRICULTURAL POPULATION 1.4 2.1 2.9 3.3 NON-AGRICULTURAL POPULATION 8.7 9.2 - - TOTAL POPULATION 2.8 3.4 - - (Agricultural Population without 1.1 1.9 2.1 2.5 Western Division)

Source: 1973 and 1983 Population end Housing Censuses and NASS 90. See Statistical Annal( for datail. and actual population figures. Note: Population age groupings in NASS 90 were 14-65 rather than tha 15-64 grouping used In the two Ceneu •••• Hence the rates for the period 1983-90 would be .Iight overe.tim.te. of the growth In the 15-64 age group.

While the agricultural population in central Gambia increased only marginally, the Western and Upper River Divisions have witnessed a population explosion. Agricultural population in the Western division grew at almost 6 percent per year through the period 1983-90, while the Upper River division grew at 4.7 percent annually for the same period. For the Western Division, it is difficult to draw conclusions about agricultural employment using these statistics·.. Unlike· other Divisions, numerous non-agricultural labor opportunities exist even for self-declared farmers in the Western Division. Many households even as far away from Banjul as the FoJiis have a primary wage earner who is employed in the Kombo St. Mary's vicinity. Hence increases in "agricultural population" in the Western Division may have little relation to increases in agricultural employment.

Agricultural population growth in the Upper River Division is more difficult to explain. The figures shown in Table 3 exclude Basse and hence should not be affected by its growth as a regional center. Agriculture in Upper River is less mechanized than in other areas. Explanations for the rapid growth rate might include immigration from nearby non­ Gambian regions, variation in the population estimate, or even the purported higher birth rate of the Serahulis. Notwithstanding these hypotheses, a better explanation is needed for these changes in the Upper River. Informal interviews with farmers suggest that the number of farmers has increased only slightly. Furthermore, evidence from satellite imagery analyzed by the Gambian-German Forestry Project suggests that a limited amount of forest is regenerating in the Upper River Division. This would be difficult to explain in light of rapid pOl?ulation growth and growing de.mands on forest areas. Further research will have to examine the underlying explanation of such changes:

- 10- The figures discussed above concern agricultural popl:.llation rather than agricultural employment, which is the intended focus of this section. Since estimates of agricultural employment are not available for the period, one must assess the link between population and employment data. Two factors, the decline and near disappearance of predominantly non-Gambian strange farmers 10 and the growth of non-farm activities in rural areas (see discussion below) lead one to conclude that these figures of agricultural population overestimate changes in agricultural employment levels. That is, one can tentatively conclude that agricultural employment has grown more slowly than agricultural population. If this is true, then one might justly conclude that agricultural employment has been stagnant or even declining in regions like the North Bank and MID-North Divisions.

Anecdotal evidences gathered from interviews carried out with farmers provides additional support for the assertion that employment in agriculture has increased only marginally in most of The Gambia. In parts of the Western Division, land owners have had to clear land as an enticement to labor to cultivate it. Among the reasons for the constancy in farming numbers, farmers are quick to point out, is the rapid and thorough mechanization of the Gambian farming system - a fundamental structural change which is at the heart of a silent transformation which has occurred in recent decades.

C. Or Silent Transformation?

The basic assumptions of stagnation are therefore correct. Cultivated area has increased only slightly, and in some areas not at all, and this while suitable land was available in much of the country. Yields of the major crops, including groundnuts and coarse grains, have not been encouraging. And the rapid outmigration of labor from rural areas appears to have left about the same number of workers on farm as were there in the early 1970's.

o Animal Traction and Productivity

As Sum berg and Gilbert (1988) note in their study of animal traction and crop production in The Gambia, traction had been promoted by the Department of Agriculture since the late 1940's, but its focus was mostly upon oxen. The most dramatic expansion of animal traction occurred in the use of equines and appears to have begun in the mid- to late-1970s. Estimates from the 1974 NASS showed a donkey population of 10,500 and a horse population of 5,000. By 1987, the numbers had risen to 37,000 donkeys and 16,000 horses, increases of 320 and 352 percent respectively, or an average annual increase during the period of 25 percent. The growth in equines is compared in Figure 6 with the growth in agricultural population.

By 1987, more than 70 percent of farming households owned at least one draft animal, making The Gambia one of the most highly mechanized farming systems in West Africa. In the North Bank, almost nine out of ten households owned draft, while the comparable figure was more than eight out of ten in MID-North and tt'le Upper River Divisions (Sum berg and Gilbert 1988).

This rapid growth in equines is made more remarkable given the unfavorable mortality and foaling rates for both horses and donkeys. To maIntain an annual growth of

- 11 - Figure 6: Equine and Agricl!ltural Population, 1974 and 1991

Equine Population Agricultural Population

OoIlters 1974 1974 • 1991 1991

25 percent over the period, farm households must make net annual purchases equivalent to 45 percent of the national herd. "Thus the increase in the number of equines over the last fifteen years has entailed a very significant (and apparently continuing) cash investment from the rural sector" (Sumberg and Gilbert 1988: 6 and 10). In addition, Sum berg and Gilbert conclude that it is difficult to argue that the lack of credit has been or continues to be the major constraint to the expansion of animal traction.

The growth in animal traction has enabled a dramatic increase in labor productivity. Farmers informally estimate that fieldwork which takes ten days without traction take only one or two with traction. More formal estimates were carried out by Sum berg and Gilbert (1988). They used multiple regression on cross-sectional NASS data to estimate the increases in cultivated area resulting from increased animal traction. They estimated an increase in 0.8 hectares of cultivated area per household for each additional donkey and 1.6 hectares for each additional horse.

These productivity figures provide an additional source of evidence that employment levels in agriculture may have remained stagnant in recent decades. Given the additional 11,184 horses and 20,720 donkeys added to The Gambia's livestock population between 1974 and 1991, one can assume that an additional 34,470 hectares could have been cultivated at the end of the period without any increase in labor. Yet national upland area is estimated to have increased by only 33,200 during the period, even less than the amount enabled by the increase in traction.

The transformation in .animal traction is continuing as farmers continue to invest in improvements. Increasingly, farmers prefer no-till seeding, allowing them to rapidly cover large areas. Growth of this practice, and in general the preference of horses and donkeys over oxen, may in part explain declining fallow rates. Horses and donkeys are not as strong as oxen, and therefore have more difficulty in plowing fields which have been fallow for more than a few years. Differential strength levels between oxen and equines,

12 as well as different levels of trypanosomiasis resistance, explain in part why horse and donkey traction has caught on more slowly in the lower River and Western Divisions, where larger areas are taken from fallow each year.

The near. disappearance of strange farm~rsfrom the Gambian farming landscape is closely associated with and explained by this rise in animal trac~ionand farming productivity. In the 19BO's it was thought that strange farmers numbered as many as 50,000. Dunsmore et. al. found in their sample villages in the early 1970's that almost a third of compounds studied had had strange farmers work their fields in the survey year. Of the strange farmers, 66 percent came from outside The Gambia (1976: 286). In the course of the past two decades, however, the practice of strange farming has rapidly declined. In 1990, according to the NASS, only 4 percent of groundnut area was cultivated by strange farmers.

Evidence of the rapid increase in labor productivity is provided by the data from the North Bank and MID-North. In these two areas, animal traction adoption has been the highest and area cultivated has increased fastest, that working age population has remained almost unchanged. Apparently, labor productivity increased so fast in these regions that labor was released from agriculture even as cultivated area expanded.

o Crop Mix

Even as they adopted animal traction for the cultivation of traditional upland crops, farmers have responded to external conditions by rapidly changing their mix of crops and varieties. The most rapid response has come in the introduction of short duration varieties in place of the long duration varieties common in the early 1970's. The planted area of short duration early millet grew by 13 percent per year between 1974 and 1991, supplanting in part the longer duration late millet and sorghum. Crops that are not easily mechanized, like findo, have decreased in importance. Shorter duration varieties have become more common for swamp rice and groundnuts, changes which have been assisted by the proliferation of stock for new varieties by NGOs and the Ministry of Agriculture. And the transformation continues today. Farmers in MID-North considered short duration by far the most important criterion in variety testing (Mills and Gilbert 1990: 52).

In addition to altering the varieties of traditional crops, farmers have begun producing new crops, the most eminent examples being vegetables, fruit, and sesame. Precise levels of involvement in vegetable gardening are difficult to estimate for years in the 1970's. Income data from Dunsmore et. aJ. (1976), which were biased towards the lower River Division, made no mention of garden produce being a source of income. Yet by 1992 the proportion of agricultural households involved in vegetable gardening was 48 percent, with the proportion at 60 percent in the lower River Division (DeCosse 1992). Over 70 percent of rural households now own fruit trees, a figure which appears to have increased in recent decades. Sesame rapidly rose from 30 hectares in 1983 to 12,000 hectares in 1986 (Owens 1992: 12). Although cultivated area had dropped to 2,000 hectares by 1990, farmers had clearly demonstrated their interest in diversifying their crop mix through this late season crop.

- 13 - One common characteristic of all the new crops added to the farming system is that they do not require significant additional labor or capital. Certainly this is abundantly true for sesame and fruit tree cultivation. Gardening provides a partial exception since women have shown a disposition to invest both labor and capital (especially fertilizer) in their gardens. The cost of female labor invested in gardening is lower than that of men, however, since the opportunities for female labor outside of gardening are less, particularly in the dry season when gardening occurs.

o Non-Farm Employment: As Important As Farming?

Logic would have it that the dramatic increases in labor productivity which have occurred in The Gambia would allow farmers to expand their area cultivated at rates far greater than have occurred. As we have seen, this expansion has not occurred to any significant degree, even though land has been physically available. Instead, labor has been freed up to move into new crops, as discussed above, and into a host of non-farm activities. In this section, we review the available evidence about the nature of changes in non-farm employment which have occurred in recent decades in The 'Gambia. It is argued that, as labor has been released from the farm through productivity increases, non-farm income sources'have played an.increasingly important role for the Gambian farming household. .

Certainly the most commonly discussed non-farm income generating activity of the rural household is emigration to other areas of The Gambia or abroad. Stories of the vast quantities of money that can be made working abroad, fueled by those who are able to build concrete compounds in the village, have inspired many others to follow their path. Evidence indicates that the capacity to earn regular income elsewhere is real: NASS data from 1990 showed that over 30 percent of households claimed that they "regularly received remittances" from off-farm family members. This figure tended to be higher in western Gambia and lower in the east. In the Lower River division, 45 percent of agricultural households said they regularly received remittances. Increasingly, organizations like the "Sons of Mamutfana" and the "Fass Youth Organization" form to channel resources back to the village.

Many of the off-farm opportunities for the rural household have come from the burgeoning services sector (see Figure 1). Whether simply in the off-season or year round, , rural men know they can always go to Banjul and carry bags of rice or other imported goods at day rates which are competitive with farming.

In addition to the new off-farm income sources for the rural household go new income sources from non-farm activities occurring in the rural areas. Statistics are hard to come by for the growth in these enterprises, but it appears that the most common areas include petty trading and blacksmithing (especially for draft machinery).

Figure 7 shows an estimate of the changing income composition of rural households between the periods 1972 and 1989. Non-farm income is shown to have increased from 23 percent of rural household income in 1972 to 43 percent in 1989. The estimates were made using results to surveys reported on in Dunsmore et. al. (1976) and Jabara (1989).11 Many farmers interviewed for this report informally estimated that

- 14 -. . •

Figure 7: Rural Income Sources, 1972 and 1989

Farm 57%

Non - farm 23% • Non - farm 43% 1972 1989

Source: Dunsmore et.al. fOL 1972; Jabara et.al. for 1989

about half of their income was derived from farming. The changing GOP statistics reviewed above, which showed decline in crop production as a proportion of national income, would support these household findings.

III. Discussion

It has been shown that farmers have responded to a changing set of economic and weather conditions by changing crop mix, introducing new varieties and crops, and diversifying into non-farm economic activities. In addition, it has been argued that one of the outstanding features of Gambian farming in recent decades has been farmers' desire to

get out of it. Large scale outmigration from farming, ena.ble~by increases in labor productivity and aided by a high population growth rate, has taken place. The nature of this silent transformation suggests that the oft-bantered statement that, "Farmers are no better off now than 20 years ago, n is inappropriate. Given the farmers response to external conditions, it would perhaps be better to say: "Farmers are much better off now than they would have been if they had done nothing."

A. Rethinking Farming Strategy in The Gambia

The sector trends reviewed above reflect the cumulative decisions of Gambian farmers. Just as the nature of agricultural production has changed in recent decades, so has household farming strategy. In this section some tentative conclusions are drawn about the evolving farming strategy in The Gambia.

Before addressing the farming strategy issue, it is important to clarify that economic strategies are developed taking into account the available resources of the geographically extended household rather than just those physically present in the rural

15 household. This fundamental distinction, while obvious to those closely involved with Gambian agriculture, is an important one to make for those schooled in farm economics in the western tradition. Following such a tradition, policy makers typically wonder how the resource poor farming family that one observes in the rural area would ever, for example, get access to credit. Yet unique and exceptional to the Gambian tradition are the strong economic bonds between household members, irrespective of distance. "Investment" in one son's emigration or education is assumed to generate returns for the entire household. Hence the concept of the farm struggling along with the human and capital resources available on-farm is misleading.

. Given this extended household profit maximization dimension to rural strategy, then farming must be seen as only one of a number of investments in the household "portfolio." Like any individual, the household naturally wants to mix their investments across a spectrum of low risk, but secure, and higher risk, but higher-yielding, investments. It would appear that traditional" agriculture production in The Gambia has in recent decades increasingly fulfilled the role of low risk and low return investment for the rural household. In the 1960's and early 1970's, with better rainfall patterns, more stable groundnut markets, and a relative lack of opportunities outside of farming, traditional crop production provided the most important investment in the households portfolio - it generated most of the income and provided employment opportunities for most of the household labor. But with the increasing uncertainty of groundnut marketing outlets and prices, more adverse weather conditions, and more opportunities elsewhere, the farming household has, in the language of finance, 'reduced its exposure' by investing in other areas on and off the farm. This diversification and risk reduction of the household, even where it has not translated into increased income, must be recognized as a benefit.

Given the growing importance of risk in farming strategy and the evidence of structural changes reviewed above, one might reformulate Gambian farming strategy as follows:

Continue producing the same amount of food while minimizing labor input and risk. Invest surplus labor and capital outside t;Jf farming.

To farmers, the relevant issue when considering adoption of new technologies is not whether they will generate more in returns than their cost, or whether yields per hectare will increase, but whether they will generate more than the farmer could have received elsewhere. With the exception of investments ·such as animal traction, which release labor for investment elsewhere (school, emigration), rural people have been altogether unwilling to invest in their farming operations, and this has caused considerable consternation amongst development planners. Farmers are unwilling to pay for fertilizer at its real price, for herbicides, for additional labor, or for money on loan. Planners must realize that the farming household does not invest in these inputs and technologies precisely because it can do better with its money elsewhere. Lack of cognizance of this fundamental change in Gambian farming will confound those economists and agronomists who develop 'profitable' technologies for increasing per hectare yields and production.

- 16 - . B. Land Availability

It has been argued that suitable upland farming area is available in large portions of the country, but that farmers are not interested in farming it. An.y,.,discussion of land pressure, the land frontier, and land availability, should be guidedAtwo issues: a distinction between "physical" and "economic" availability (McPherson and Posner 1991) and a distinction between farmers' and soil scientists' views of what is "suitable for cultivation." This paper has shown that, in the North Bank, Lower River and Western divisions, ample suitable upland is physically available for farming. Economically, however, given the reservation wage in those areas (which are closely linked to Banjul labor markets), it is not worth farmers' time to clear new land. 12 This same economic cost of land clearing partially explains the low and declining fallow rates in such areas as the North Bank. The same fields are farmed over and over until soils begin to wash and blow away because the labor costs of clearing even fallow land are too great. While one man and a horse can quickly burn, clear, and plant a field that has been planted in the previous season, significantly more energy (Le., a pair of oxen and more than one person) is required to clear and plant a field that has been in fallow for more than two years. Finally, the cost of clearing land distant from the village, even if the land is suitable, may be prohibitive.

Dunsmore's assessment of "suitable" upland needs to be reconsidered in light of . farmer's perceptions of the same land. The Forestry Department has become increasingly active in telling farmers that certain lands are off limits for cultivation. Farmer's complain that they can no longer clear lands that have been in fallow for more than two or three years because the Forestry Department calls them "forest" and says farmers need a permit to cut trees. To the extent that the Forestry Department is acting as a deterrent to clearing of suitable upland from fallow, then the total "suitable" upland area is effectively declining. In addition, an unmeasured amount of land in the Western and North Bank Divisions has been fenced off for present or future horticultural production, and is therefore no longer available f.or upland cultivation.

C. Regional Differences in Gambian Farming Systems

Structural change has occurred on different paths in different regions of the country. In order to understand the nature of changes that have occurred and, more importantly, those that may occur in the future, it is helpful to divide The Gambia into three regions: the Southwest (Western and Lower River divisions), the Southeast (MID­ South and Upper River Divisions), and the North Bank (MID-North and the North Bank Divisions). This regional perspective needs to be kept in mind when exploring the implications of structural transformation.

Farmers on the North Bank, while b~comingthe most productive ill the country (in terms of area cultivated per person), have expanded their cuJtivated area even as the number of farmers remained more or less the same. By 1990, farmers in these two regions cultivated 43 percent of the country's upland area aithough they accounted for only 26 percent of the agircultural population. It is in these regions that extensive investment in the farm enterprise has occurred, primarily through animal traction, but also in such inputs as fertilizer and pesticides. Although intensification has occured through the rapid expansion of vegetable gardens, sesame production and fruit tree CUltivation,

- 17 - Figure 8: Area Cultivated and Agricultural Population, by Division

Percent of National Total 30r-~------~------~ (0.36) (0.65 I 25 (Hectares per Worbng Age Adult In Agllculturel

( 1.181 20

(0.9BI (0 .77) 15

10

5 o Western North BankLower River MID-North MIO-South Upper River DIVISIon

_ Area Cultivated ~ Agrlc. Population

Sou Ice: NASS 90

there is scant evidence to show that yields of groundnuts or coarse grains are in for a change any time soon_

Farmers in the Southwest, although having become more mechanized and productive in recent decades, are still the least productive in the country. Although it has not been adequately researched or documented, it appears that the links between villages in these regions and the urban areas are so close, and movement back and forth so regular, that even they do not consider themselves farmers. Farming activities appear to account for a smaller portion of household income in this region than anywhere in the country. When asked what they expect for the future in these regions, farmers say that they expect the number of cattle to increase, the forest to disappear, and the number of fruit trees to abound.13

Southeast Gambia accounts for a third distinct region. There, a higher level of land pressure and conflicts has coupled with a greater distance from in-country employment opportunities. With fewer opportunities available out of farming, farming appears to playa more important role in household income generation than non-farm activities.

- 18 - IV. Conclusions and Policy Implications

In the preceding sections, it has been argued that the assumptions of stagnation in Gambian agriculture are appropriate when applied to total cultivated area, yields per hectare, and agricultural employment. Nevertheless, stagnancy in these indicators hides the dynamic though silent transformation which has occurred in agricultural production since the early 1970s. Faced by increasingly adverse rainfall conditions, increasing fertilizer prices, unstable groundnut prices, weakening agricultural institutions and an abundance of non-farm job opportunities, farmers have radically transformed their production strategy. Crucial to this transformation was the rapid adoption of equine animal traction, which allowed tpem to speed the completion of planting and weeding while maintaining a constant farm labor force. Increased use of (albeit subsidized) fertilizer, varietal adaptation (e.g., early millet for late), and the rapid growth of selected new crops have allowed farmers to "stay even" as external conditions became worse. With labor released through animal traction, rural households have been able to increase their income from non-farm activities and hence reduce their future exposure to shocks like the drought of the early 1970s. Increasingly, the farmer will only invest labor and capital in the farm if the investment will not jeopardize the food production levels of the household and will generate a return at least as good as opportunities off the farm.

A. The Role of Agriculture in The Gambian Economy

In additions to these conclusions, a series of policy implications can be drawn. It will be increasingly important for both Government and donors to consider more closely what role they can expect agricultural production to play in the Gambian economy. Given its proportion in the Gross Domestic Product and the large number of people it employs, growth in agricultural has been considered fundamental to growth in the national economy. The goals of the Economic Recovery Programme (ERP) included the diversification of agricultural production and exports and an increased self-sufficiency in food. Although crop diversification and non-groundnut agricultural exports have increased since the ERP, the goal of self-sufficiency in food, in a race with rapid population growth, seems to be further than ever from realization. Among traditional rain-fed crops, only the coarse grains have responded through production increases, but they have done little more than supplant production of other upland crops. Certainly, large-scale investments in agricultural extension and research have been only marginally effective in increasing the production of traditional upland crops. In spite of millions of Dalasis in lowland rice improvement projects, rice production has continued to decline. Furthermore, evidence indicates that farmers account for a smaller portion of The Gambia's population than ever. The frequently bantered about estimate of agricultural labor as "75 percent of the Gambian labor force" needs to be revised downward, perhaps even to as low as 50 percent.

Given these changes, the Government and donors need to reconsider, and probably lower their expectations for, what they can expect of agriculture. It appears unlikely, given the past trends, that agriculture will become an engine for growth through the expansion of traditional crop production. It is necessary to question the appropriateness of multi-million Dalasi investments designed to introduce technologies which will dramatically improve crop yields and intensify production. When "improved" technologies have been promoted in the past, farmers have demonstrated their level of interest in intensifying crop

- 19 - . • •

production by voting with their feet and moving to Serrekunda. The technologies which have been of interest are those which have helped the farmer to maintain the same level of output in increasingly harsh farming conditions. In general, the plethora of projects designed in recent decades have not taken adequate account of the non-farm opportunities open to the rural population nor of the higher earnings farmers perceive from those opportunities. And as long as the future appears brighter in the non-farm economy, farm families will continue to treat their agricultural holdings as means of providing for a bit of food security and perhaps limited cash income at low risk.

B. The Role of Government and Donors in Agriculture

On the whole, Government and donors have been unwilling to accept these trends. Research and extension, bott; inside and outside of Government, continue to be guided by n the goal of "turning the corner • in agriculture. 'The solution is sought which will at the least make it productive for farmers to stay on the farm rather than seeking new horizons outside of farming. And yet, even after 20 years of tinkering with the message and means of delivering it, farmers are still leaving in droves. One implication of this paper is that the trend for farmers to move out of farming and the rural areas is apparently based on strong economic reasoning. They are going because the technologies that have been recommended to them are on the whole not appropriate given what they can do elsewhere. As Government and donors search for their appropriate role in the new environment, it will be essential to keep this issue of relative earnings in mind.

The Government can still serve to promote adaptation and growth in target areas. The policy of diversification has, quite literally, borne fruit. Efforts in development and promotion of sesame, fruit, small-scale vegetable production and ram fattening should be continued. Research developments which improve coarse grain output will have broad impact and be rapidly adopted, as will those which can reduce post harvest losses of groundnuts. For all appropriate new technologies, the common denominator must be "minimum labor input." The Government should continue to look at land tenure conflicts insofar as they constrain the expansion of small-scale vegetable and fruit production. Continued support to the development of domestic oil processing will be helpful, especially if sesame is not to continue its decline.

The size of future investments, however, needs to be more realistically gauged and the impact areas focused. Programs designed to change the farm production strategies of the mass of Gambian farmers are obsolete since the mass of Gambian farmers are not . interested in expanding production or investment unless they can do it at little or no cost or risk to the household. New programs will have to be designed to target those few farmers who are willing to invest in agriculture. This obviously raises issues of equity, since it may mean in practice that assistance is not provided to all Divisions equally, all ethnic groups equally, or all lineages equally. With more than twenty years of agricultural investment projects for reference, it is time that a more realistic expectation of benefits versus costs of investments were carried out.

More generally, the Government needs to recognize that the best way to support agriculture, rather than designing more national research and extension projects, is to support the development of the rural economy through assistance in the creation of rural

- 20-, ..

non-farm opportunities. As was shown in the review of income sources, farm households now get almost half their income from non-farm activities. Only when more of these • opportunities are based in the rural areas (rather than in Banjul or abroad) will the relative attractiveness of investment in agriculture increase. One obvious though expensive way to provide opportunities in the rural areas is to improve access of the rural population to primary and secondary education. Rural-based tourism enterprises are another avenue of employment creation and need to be supported and guided. Farmers have demonstrated their interest in the management of natural resources like forests and range, which can provide non-farm income at low input costs with minimum risk. Technologies which increase the value-added to agricultural produce at the village or regional level need to be extended. Although petrol-powered milling machines are one example, a number of animal and human powered technologies for processing of farm products are being actively experimented with in Senegal. Village processing of horticultural products needs to be researched and promoted • .

Although the idea may be fraught with political ramifications at home and abroad, donors and the Government, both of whom have praised the efficiency of the free movement of G'':ods and services, might consider assisting in the movement of Gambian labor to more productive enterprises outside The Gambia through the creation of a "Department of Emigration. n The economic rationale for such an effort is simple: the Government would be directly fulfilling its role of assisting the markets by providing information (say about employment opportunities, health, banking needs) so that transaction costs for labor would be reduced. It makes economic sense for resources to move where they are most productive. Lessons about assisting the export of labor might be learned from countries which routinely export cheap labor (say, the Philippines and Indonesia). Such emigration 3ssistance, rather than reducing productivity in the agricultural sector, might serve to increase it. Increased access to capital abroad would likely serve to capitalize Gambian agriculture beyond its current levels (the few tractors operating in Upper River and MID were certainly not bought from farm earnings). In any case, many rural people have already emigrated. The provision of such assistance would only make their links to The Gambia more efficient. Farmers, no doubt, would flock to such a Department for their assistance.

C. Imported Rice and Structural Change

Relatively cheap imported rice has played a supporting role in the evolution of Gambian agriculture. To understand why this is the case, policy-makers need to see that the farmer is as much rice consumer as rice producer. With cheap rice available, the surplus-producing coarse grain farmer can now sell more of his grains and buy imported rice, thereby diversifying household consumption while reducing food processing costs for the women of the household. Furthermore, it is the very presence of cheap rice which in part has enabled women to substitute gardening for rice growing as their rice growing lands have disappeared with the decline in rainfall. In 1986, according to the NASS, only 48 percent of rural households were rice producers. Yet according to unpublished 1990 NASS data, over 50 percent of farming households were consumers of imported rice. In the Upper River, the ratio was more than one in two and in the North Bank almost seven out of ten. Hence increases in the import duty on rice, and ultimately in its retail price, would hurt more of the rural population than it is designed to help.

- 21 - , ' D. The Response to Macro-Policy Changes

The macroeconomic and sector policy changes resulting from the Economic Recovery Programme (ERP) and the Programme for Sustained Development (PSD) were supposed to have been particularly favorable to agriculture. On the whole, however, farmers perceive that the climate for agriculture has become worse rather than better. Certainly, groundnut production has not responded as hoped. While the exchange rate devaluation has provided increased opportunities for fruit, vegetable, millet and groundnut hay exports 14, the overall response has not been as dramatic as expected. Detailed analysis of the agriculture sector's response to the. macro-policy changes has been looked at in depth elsewhere (McPherson and Posner 1991) and will not be reiterated here. Rather, focus here is upon issues related to the sectoral trends reviewed above.

The policy reforms of the ERP brought with them a squeezing of the farmer through increased input prices and increasingly unstable groundnut prices. The increasing risk and uncertainty involved with groundnut production explains in part the continued decline of the crop.

One simple reason that the macro-policy changes have had limited impact in increasing agricultural production is that they created employment opportunities outside of agriculture more rapidly than inside. The rapid response of external assistance to the policy reforms has been shown above and discussed in McPherson and Radelet (1987). Ultimately, consideration of the impact of policy changes on the well-being of farming households should not be guided by agricultural production statistics but by rural household income. If the reforms have increased rural income through migration and remittances, then this must be considered a success. Data soon to be released from the Central Statistics Department's Priority Surveys will help to understand changes in farm and non-farm income.

E. The Changing Role of Women in Agriculture

Especially in farming areas where male outmigration has been high (Upper River and North Bank Divisions), women have played an increasingly important role in groundnut, vegetable and even coarse grain production. In 1991, women farmed 23 percent of groundnut area. This figure was 66 percent for the Upper River Division, where extensive emigration of men has transferred increasing responsibilities to women. Although earlier survey data (e.g., from Dunsmore et. a!. (1976) or Haydu et. a!. (1986)) do not report area cultivated by wome,;; it' appears from interviews with farmers that the proportion of upland cereal cultivation by women is also increasing. Schroeder's research in the North Bank (1991) has shown that the women's role as cash earner in gardening areas has risen in importance. If it is indeed the case that women are cultivating more of the groundnuts and coarse grains than before, then "extension services will have to be geared accordingly. It may be possible that the taboo against women using animal traction (as has been recommended for rice) be lifted in certain areas if the need is great enough.

- 22-

. ; F. Agriculture and Natural Resource Conservation

Although there is as yet limited hard evidence to prove it,'5 it appears from discussions with farmers that soil fertility and productivity are declining throughout the country. Asked why productivity is declining, farmers will respond without hesitation, "because there is not enough fertilizer." To this must be added the decline in fallow periods. Declining productivity is increasingly both cause and effect of limited production increases: cause because farmers are starting with a deficit in production capital; effect because the practices they employ further soil decline. It will be important to discern the effect of different farming practices, especially the increasingly common pre-plowing burning of fields and declining fallow rates, on fertility levels.

G. Appropriate Indicators for Measuring Change

The silent transformation of Gambian agriculture has taken place in areas not commonly or easily tracked by national level statistics. Returns to labor, labor productivity, income diversification, risk reduction -- none of these statistics are commonly reported on when assessing the success or failure of i'nterventions. Future impact evaluations in agriculture will need to be guided by these "silent" statistics rather than just the standard statistics of area, yield, and production.

V. Directions for Future Research and Analysis • Future research and analysis of the themes reviewed here should be concentrated a few select areas. Diversification efforts in research and extension should continue to build upon the rural household's interest in risk and income diversification. This paper has argued that the availability of off-farm opportunities and income sources has been a driving force behind the structural change in the agricultural sector. Yet far too little is presently known about the diverse income sources and asset transfers between members of the farming household. The results to the Central Statistics Departments nationwide household surveys should for the firsS time offer a picture of the relative importance of different income sources by region of the country. In addition, such an income analysis would be useful in the process of identifying the distinguishing features of the few highly capitalized farming "t'ousehoids. Understanding of how remittances are used may be a key to understanding the capitalization of farms that has occurred in the recent decades, and the potential for further capitalization in the future.

This analysis has focused on summary of trends at a national and Divisional level of detail at best. Yet some of the detail of structural change needs to be fleshed out at a more sharply defined level, preferably the village. In particular, it will be important to know whether such variables as farming strategy, adoption of animal traction, and rates of emigration are more likely to be associated with long-standing rather than recent settlers, one ethnic group rather than another, land allocators rather than land borrowers, or owners of large farms rather than small.

The aggregated land availability and land use data presented above will have to be complemented in future discussion by a reconsideration of what Dunsmore et. al. described as "suitable" for upland cultivation in light of farmers perception of the same

- 23- land. Such a comparison may be a key to solving the dilemma of the North Bank, where data from Dunsmore et. al. suggests that ample and suitable land is available but unfarmed. It has been argued here that farmers in the North Bank leave suitable land unfarmed beca~sethey have" more attractive eC?onomicopportunities elsewhere. A survey of farmer's perceptions of soil fertility for a selected sample of villages in the North Bank could be usefully compared to soils maps from Dunsmore et. al. · An example of such a study is Mills, Kabay and Boughton (1988).

VI. The Future of Gambian Farming?

Ester Boserup, writing in the 1960's, argued that as population densities increase, cultivated farmland increases until it reaches the land frontier. When this has been reached, a shift to greater agricultural production and more intensive land use takes place autonomously as a result of market forces. As land becomes scarce, its price rises and it becomes relatively more valuable than labor. Investments in land productivity become increasingly attractive as the demand for food increases from the growing population (1965). Lele and Stone (1989) attempted to update Boserup's hypothesis and make it relevant for Africa by making a closer analysis of the non-market forces which affect agricultural transformation. They found limitations in the Boserup model's ability to explain certain characteristics of African agriculture, but argued that with an appropriate policy environment, the transformation and intensification of agriculture in Africa would proceed.

Results from the above analysis call into question whether The Gambia is even on the road to intensification. Yields per hectare are not increasing and may even be declining. While capital investment in agriculture has occurred, it has not been of the sort which brings dramatic household production increases, but rather increases in labor productivity. Emigration continues unabated. While new crops can be promoted and new varieties distributed, the hope for Gambia's agricultural sector providing enough food for its population is presently slim. Furthermore, donor funding and the reexport trade, which have been engines of The Gambia's growth and important determinants of the present agricultural situation, are determined outside The Gambia and subject to change at any time. The impact of either a dramatic decline in donor funding levels or a devalued CFA could be severe for both urban and rural households.

Nevertheleis, if Government and donors channel their resources to the areas in which farmers have demonstrated their interest, the potential for development of the rural household and an improved agricultural economy is real. Farmers have demonstated their capacity to rapidly change and adapt. They will continue to adapt their farming production to fit external conditions. If they perceive signals which tell them that the potential for the rural areas is brighter than in the past, they will act upon it. Income generation and employment opportunities in the rural areas can grow when the adaptive capacity of the farmer is taken advantage of. Agricultural diversification has been the buzzword, but it is not realistic and not enough. Development of alternative economic opportunities in the rural areas will provide the income growth for the farming household, and will have

beneficial feedback t.Q f~rmproductivity and output.

- 24- Statistical Annex

Table A1: Agricultural and Non-Agricultural Population in The Gambia, 1973-90 - Annual % Annual % Change Change POPULATION 197.3 1983 1990 73-83 83-90 GROUP AND DIVISION 15-64 Total 15-64 Total 14-65 Total 15-64 Total 15-64' Total

Agricultural Poeulation

-Western 37,363 69,016 47,255 95,942 69,879 143,041 3.3 3.4 5.8 5.9 -North Bank 44,650 85,290 45,591 94,366 48,142 98,724 0.2 1.0 0.8 0.7 -Lower River 22,371 40.860 25,141 50,141 28,925 59,653 1.2 2.1 2.0 2.5 -MID-North 24,504 44,202 27.489 53,033 26,786 55,929 1.2 1.8 0.0 0.8 -MID-South 27,276 49,262 31,841 61,379 35,888 73,897 1.6 2.2 1.7 2.7 -Upper River 42,687 80,299 50,676 101,697 68,983 140,478 1.7 2.4 4.5 4.7 Total 198,851 368,929 227,993 456.558 278,873 571,722 1.4 2.1 2.9 3.3 Non-Agric'l Poeulation 70,264 124,570 125,863 231,232 -- 8.7 9.2 - - Total Poeulation 269,115 493,499 353,855 687.817 -- 2.8 3.4 - - Agric. Poe. wlo Western Division 161.488 299,913 180,738 360,616 208,994 428,681 1.1 1.9 2.1 2.5

Source: Results for 1973 and 1983 are from the Populetion and Housing Cansusas for thosa yaars. Rasults for 1990 come from the National Agricultural Sampla Survay of 1990 (sae The Statistical Yaarbook of Gembian Agriculture: .l!!Q1. Agricultural population includes all those people living in araas defined as rural. Tha Censuses do not report rasults based on agricultural and non-agricultural population, so loma manipulation of the date had to be carried out in order to maka it compatibla with agricultural population data from the NASS. The following regional or administrative centers were counted as non-agricultural in the Census dltl: Brikaml, Gunjur, Llmin, Sukuta, Bwiam, Mansa Konko, Soma, Barra, Essau, Kerewan, Farafenni, Kaur, Kuntaur, Bansan;, BaSSI, Fatoto, and Georgetown. These villages are not part of the NASS sampling frame. Notes: 11 The working age population grouping used in the NASS (14-65) is broeder than that of the Censuses (15-64). Annual chsnge figures for 1983-90 for the working age populetion mey thus be considered a slight overestimate.

- 25 - , '

References

Ahmed, Iqbal, Arne Bigsten, Jorge A. Munoz and Prem Vashishtha 1991 "Poverty In The Gambia". International Labour Office, Geneva.

Central Statistics Department 1992 "Statistical Abstract Of The Gambia, 1991".

DeCosse, Philip J. and Ebrima Camara 1990 "A Profile Of.The Horticultural Production Sector In The Gambia." Paper commissioned for presentation at National Horticultural Policy Planning Workshop, Kairaba Beach Hotel.

DeCosse, Philip 1992 "Agriculture and Natural Resources Baseline Survey and Monitoring System for USAID/Banjul." Consultancy Report.

Dunsmore, J.R, Blair A. Rains, G.D.N. Lowe, D.J. Moffatt. I.P. Anderson and J.B. Williams 1976 The Agricultural Development of The Gambia: An Agricultural, Environmental and Socioeconomic Analysis. Land Resource Study 22, Land Resources Division, Ministry of Overseas Development. Surrey, England.

Government of The Gambia 1990 "Executive Summary, Programmed for Sustained Development, Sectoral Strategies". The Gambia Roundtable Conference.

1991 "Report on the National Workshop on Sub-Regional Cooperation in the Management and Harmonization of Food Security Policies." Banjul, 13-14 November.

1992 "The Gambia Environmental Action Plan 1992 - 2001". Vol. I, Final Draft, Banjul. The Environment Unit of The Ministry of Natural Resources and The Environment

Haggblade, Steven, Peter Hazel and James Brown 1989 "Farm-Nonfarm Linkages in Rural Sub-Saharan Africa". World Development. Vol. 17, No.8. pp. 1173-1202.

Haydu. J. M. Alers-Montalvo. J.B. Eckert. F. Dumbuya. B. Gai. and L. Jabang . 1986 "Mixed Farming In The Gambia". Technical Report No. 10. Consortium for International Development Colorado State University.

Jabara Cathy L. 1990 Economic Reform and Poverty In The Gambia. A Survey of Pre- and Post­

ERP Experience. Cornell Food and ~utritionPolicy Program.

- 26- •

Jabara, Cathy L., Marjatta Tolvanen, Mattias K.A. Lundberg and Rohey Wadda 1991 "Incomes, Nutrition, And Poverty In The Gambia, Results From The CFNPP Household Survey." Cornell University Food and Nutrition Policy Program, Washington, D.C.

Lele, Uma and Steven W. Stone 1989 Population Pressure, The Environment And Agricultural Intensification: Variations On The Boserup Hypothesis. Managing Agricultural Development In Africa, Discussion Paper 4. The World Bank: Washington, D.C.

McPherson, Malcolm and Joshua L. Posner 1991 "Structural Adjustment and Agriculture in Sub-Saharan Africa: Lessons from The Gambia". Paper written for the 11 th Annual Symposium of the Association for Farming System Research-Extension, Michigan State University.

McPherson, Malcolm F. and Steven C. Radelet 1987 "Economic Reform in The Gambia: Policies, Politics, Foreign Aid, and Luck." Draft prepared for Harvard Institute for International Development. Cambridge, MA: mimeographed.

Mills, Bradford F., Mohamed- B. Kabay and Duncan Boughton 1988 "Soil Fertility Management Strategies in three Villages of Eastern Gambia". Research Paper No.2. Ministry of Agriculture, Department of Agricultural Research.

Mills, Bradford and Elon Gilbert 1990 "Agricultural Innovation and Technology Testing by Gambian Farmers: Hope for Institutionalizing On-Farm Research in Small-Country Research Systems?" Paper prepared for presentation at the Ninth Annual Farming Systems Research-Extension Symposium, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, October 9-11, 1989.

Ministry of Trade, Industry and Employment 1991 "Statistical Monograph No.1". Trade Statistics

National Agricultural Data Centre (NADC) 1992 "Statistical Yearbook Of Gambian Agriculture: 1991". Department Of Planning, Ministry Of Agriculture, Banjul.

Owens, Solomon J.E. 1992 "NGOs Involvement in National Agricultural Development Through Technology Development and Promotion: The Case of CRS in The Gambia." Catholic Relief ServiceslThe Gambia Program, Banjul.

Posner, Joshua L. and Elon Gilbert 1987a "District Agricultural Profile of Central Baddibu District, North Bank Division." Gambian Agricultural Research Paper 2. Ministry of Agriculture, Banjul, The Ga~bia.

- 27- I · '

1987b "District Agricultural Profile of Foiii Brefet and FoRi Bintang-Karenai, Western Division." Gambian Agricultural Research Paper 3. Ministry of Agriculture, Banjul, The Gambia.

Posner, Joshua L. and Tijan Jal\ow 1987 "A Survey of Groundnut and Millet Farming Practices: Implications for Agronomic Research". Research Paper No.1. Ministry Of Agriculture, Banjul, The Gambia.

Schroeder, Richard A. 1991 "Defending a Female Cash Crop: Threats to The Gambia's Market Garden Boom." Prepared for the National Workshop on 'Horticultural Programming in Rural Gambia,' November ,4, 1991 at the Atlantic Hotel,.The Gambia. Co-sponsored by Save the Children Federation/USA and the Department of Agricultural Research.

Sum berg J. and E. Gilbert 1988 "Draft Animals And Crop Production In The Gambia". Department Of Animal Health and Production, Abuko, The Gambia, Unpublished. .

Sumberg J.E. 1991 "Livestock Development Policy in The Gambia: A Case of 'Cattle Industry' Complex". Unpublished manuscript.

Thoma W. and S. Jaiteh 1991 "Possibilities of Introducting Community Forestry In The Gambia: Part III." Gambian-German Forestry Project Report No. 24. April.

United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)

1989 "The Gambia: Development Cooperation 1988 Report.'~.Banjul.

1991 "The Gambia: Development Cooperation 1990 Report." Banjul.

1992 "The Gambia: Development Cooperation 1991 Report." Banjul.

United States Agency for International Development (USAID) 1992 Program Assistance Approval Document for the Agricultural and Natural Resources Program and Project. Banjul.

von Bruan, Joachim and Detlev Puetz 1986 "Preliminary Results of IFPRI - PPMU Survey on Agriculture, Consumption, and Nutrition in the MacCarthy Island Division - Area of Jahally-Pachar Project". International Food Policy Research Institute. Washington, D. C.

von Braun, Joachim, Deltev Puetz and Patrick Webb 1989 "Irrigation Technology and Commercialization of Rice in The Gambia: Effects on Income and Nutrition". International Food Policy Research Institute .. Washington D. C•• Rice

of

effects

Research

The

Policy

Food

Control:

Resource

International

and

29-

-

Africa.

C.

D.

West

in

Decisionmaking

Washington,

"Intrahousehold

commercialization Institute.

1989

Patrick

Webb

" ... • •

Endnotes

1. In 1988, donor spending in agriculture was $10m, the GOTG budget was $1.8m, and agricultural GDP was $56m. In 1990, donor spending in agriculture was $10m, the GOTG budget was $2m and agricultural GDP was approximately $48m.

2. The following quotations suggest the regularity with assumptions of agricultural stagnation appear:

"Although land availability should not be a constraint, the rural population are increasingly putting pressure on upland areas, moreover traditional slash and burn agriculture is being replaced by sedentary farming and short fallow periods. This has a negative impact on the environment and on agricultural productivity... It (UNDP, 1989: 9)

"Constraints on productivity growth [ ... J stem from the increasing pressure of population on limited arable land of good quality. Because of this, the length of the fallow periods traditionally allowed by Gambian farmers to restore soil fertility has decreased from between five to seven years to about two to three." (Jabara 1990: 14)

"The semi-subsistence nature of the country's agriculture and traditional resource management systems have led to stagnant production, low productivity, and a degredation of the natural resource base. It (USAID 1992:1)

In addition, the main recommendations of a high level Government workshop on food security in The Gambia called for the creation of National Food Security Commission to reexamine

"The extremely liberal stance of The Gambia in the cereals sub-sector in the light of stagnating levels of cereal production." (GOTG 1991: 9)

3. See quotations in endnote number 2.

4. The distinction follows closely the discussion of McPherson and Posner (1991).

5. International Monetary Fund statistics.

6. The growth rate was estimated using an Ordinary Least Squares regression of total cultivated area on time. The null hypothesis that cultivated area did not change (that is, that flo = 0) was rejected at a 0.05 level of significance. The annual increment of 1 ,700 hectares was compared with the mean value for cultivated area over the period to derive the annual percentage change.

7. Using soil and topographic surveys, Dunsmore et. at. (1976) divided soils in The Gambia into the following five categories: (1) unsuitable; (2) marginal; (3) suitable with qualifications; (4) suitable; and (5) suitable and irrigable. For the sake of a more

- 30- for

1,

the St. and

the

soil

or

of

of

own

food cleared study. figures, use

Annex

off-farm

The

for analysis. Jabara Kombo

fifth River are

Division. population

would own land variation

"rural" results

newly for overuse NASS changing

the (1976)

NASS.

one

Associations agriculture allow

while and and (LTC) that

of River

incomplete, al. which the final recent

in used centres. to

from used Gambia Statistical extensive and

imply Soil

of statistics.

et. 1983. rent years is the the of

estimable

the the agricultural

not as Lower

to

(4) assess income, outside came

five and in Ceflter's

of nutrients

although (1976) regional With involved edge with to results the official

from

corrected

need 1 A associations commonly

cash in in

1973 Dunsmore and every

subject . people sources

Dunsmore's et.al.

Tenure soil initial, Division

replace

category of

rates more only land

Table actively the

are of estimates possible that excludes to an

only

such estimates is evidence.

those therefore livelihood Land

the is

only valleys preliminary be

(see and

from

time. all fallow

figures

Western the NASS

from cleared added the Dunsmore their former

implies included were as from

which

data

includes be over Fonis the underestimated should

discussion available 237-46).

the from - statistical centres

from it

in

farmland, here caution. newly Census "Tributary

the derive raw can which fQr population" income survey, 31 thus See (1976)

that Shortened to centres. in ~

data area 13,

estimates excluded).

formal (1976: from restored rate who population with

regional (1991),

greater gathered al defined et.al.

LTC. distinguished

being (1988) work

available year. are fertility consistently

is imputed

et et.al. is

a been rural

regional came of

those the

fallow with excluded. centres

were available soil

cultivation" OTA "agricultural in

amendments for also been the comparable groundnut

Schulte

selected of

have Association

on figures, from from

of thus be comparison and

Dunsmore Appraisal out

to difference

percent

and

since occur is and treated have results estimate to upland Soil Dunsmore fallow Dunsmore by regional 1

national population"

data

", population"

the

be

in included in a from

for 7. Rural have

... pected of ferret ' the Census

conservative The (1987) percent

of only Peters activities which

discussion food. ex

a left to district 5 of

thus exports

and data

the in

is adjusted is resource,

situation

anecdotal are (1989)

6, list

later while

Paulino

conservative "Suitable 2, floodplain

categories 1989, these

This land land otherwise "Agricultural Mary's the were unlike should "Agricultural population," generation attempt livestock activities

See Income et.al. produced. produced

In land These Participatory which All See l' completion reported fertility

.

10

8.

,

9.

10. 11.

12.

13.

14. 15.