Productive Strategies for Poor Households to Participate Successfully in Global Economic Processes First draft Country Report for Senegal to the IDRC By Bara Gueye1

1 INTRODUCTION

Objective

The overall objective of the study is to prepare an agenda of priority research for the IDRC Rural Poverty and Environment Programme Initiative (RPE) within the theme “productive strategies for poor households to participate successfully in the global economic process”. The RPE’s mission is to contribute to the development of networks, partnerships and communities of practices, in order to strengthen institutions, policies and practices that enhance the food, water and income security of the poor, including those living in fragile or degraded uplands and coastal ecosystems.

Short description of the methodology;

The methodological process used to carry out this study combined a set of 4 complementary phases:

1 An inception phase aimed at refining the conceptual framework of the study, defining the research scope, carrying out a literature review and drafting an inception report to inform the following phases 2 Six regional scans carried through desk reviews to have an overview of socio-economic development issues of relevance of the study and to identify relevant themes that can potentially feed into regional research agendas. Identification of current research and potential partner institutions was also part of the regional scans. 3 Country level investigations carried in the pilot countries selected in each one of the six sub- regions. Country case studies were based on participatory stakeholders’ analysis with the aim of validating the regional scans reviews. An important component of the country case studies was to make an assessment of the relevance of the research themes and if necessary to propose new themes. 4 Consolidation and dissemination of he regional scans and country cases studies.

The expected results are: o inception report o regional scans o country reports o country workshops o general report with strategic research themes o calls for research proposals based on the themes identified

1 With contribution from A. Salam fall

1

Objectives of this particular document

This report combines the result of a regional scan focusing on the Sahel belt of West Africa and a more in-depth country study focusing on Senegal. The regional scan focused on the Sahelian belt of West Africa comprising Burkina Faso, Mali, Mauritania and Senegal. Mainly based on secondary data review, it was carried out to overview the socioeconomic development issues in the region relating to the adaptive capacities of the poor rural households to the global economic process, and to the mechanisms by which the enabling environment can support the participation of the rural poor. Other areas of focus of the regional scan include an overview of the current and likely future relevant research activities, the potential partners including financers for this future work and finally the identification of a list of relevant research themes that might feed into the regional agenda.

The Senegal country case study, on the other hand was undertaken to validate the regional scan finding with a particular focus on the identification of policies, processes and institutions able to expand the potential benefits of participation to the rural poor. In the agenda of the country case study was also the assessment of the relevance of the thematic research identified during the regional scan through a large consultation with key stakeholders. Unlike the regional scan, the country case study included interviews with key informants including representatives of farmers organizations, policy makers, elected members of parliaments and local governments, NGOs, international organizations, traders, researchers and extension agents. Another important component of the country case, is the organization of national workshop aimed at sharing the preliminary findings with key stakeholders, assess their relevance with regional scan and national context, add new ideas and insights to improve the report.

2

2. VALIDATION OF KEY FINDINGS FROM THE REGIONAL SCAN (GUIDELINE <8 PAGES)

2.1. HOW CAN POOR RURAL HOUSEHOLDS ADAPT THEIR LIVELIHOOD STRATEGIES TO BENEFIT FROM PARTICIPATION WITH GLOBAL ECONOMIC PROCESSES

2.1.1. Understanding the context Key findings from regional scan Views of local stakeholders Comments and analysis New narratives

Who are the poor? Overall, typology is considered to be ƒ Some areas like Kolda and 1. Small farmers living in relevant. However: Kedougou where poverty is As in other Sahelian countries the subsistence farming. ƒ Need to include geographical highest like are not the poorest in incidence of poverty is high in 2. Pastoralists with only small difference (Kolda and Kedougou natural resources: they have good Senegal ( people living below ruminants especially (less than 3 districts have highest level of rainfall, ecological diversity, low poverty line of 2400 cal/day from units) poverty) population density, fertile lands. 57,9% in 1994 to 53, 9% in 2001 3. Pastoralists who, found Therefore ill-defined policy while the 2001 survey on perception ƒ include peri-urban poor in the themselves as seasonal guards of orientations and low economic gives 65%). Poverty is more striking small herds vicinity of Dakar, Touba (highest in rural areas: between 72 et 88% diversification appear to be 4. The agro-pastoralits not having urban population growth: 4,5 to against 44 and 59% in urban areas major constraining factors. either sufficient products of 6%). (DSRP, 2002). Main rural poor are: ƒ The persistence of poverty is cattle to sell, or sufficient not yet ƒ Poverty not equality distributed Small farmers living in subsistence productive lands partly due to the fact that the farming, Pastoralists with very few even within poor community: 5. Women-head of households. primary sector whivh accounts small ruminants, pastoralists who lost inter-generational, gender and 6. The large families (10 people for 72 to 88% of the poor all their animals, agro-pastoralits not social status differences exist. and more) having too many contributes only for 19% of having either sufficient products of infants ƒ New trend: poverty national wealth, while the cattle to sell, or sufficient not yet 7. Individuals - generally pregnant productive lands, women-head of “massification” in peri-urban tertiary sector contributes for and nursing women and children cities households, large families (10 people of less than 5 years, 51% of national wealth with only and more) having too many infants,

3 physiologically fragile 14,3% (Bosco Ki, 2005) of the pregnant or nursing women and poor. Therefore the primary children physiologically fragile; peri- sector should be the driver of any urban dwellers living in land policy aimed at reducing insecurity poverty. :

Degree of rural and their influence ƒ Rural sector employs 60% of For example Kolda which has the The degree of rural influence the on participation Senegalese population lowest accessibility index (0-50 choice of participation strategy. It ƒ Degree of rural is important against a maximum of 400-500) to has been observed that: the 5 most important social sector because participation in ƒ most “rural” areas in Senegal economic processes is influenced (education, water, health, road, tend to have weak access to by infrastructure base, access to market) has the weakest links to infrastructure, education and education, to markets and to national and international markets health, information and markets. information and most remote ƒ Infrastructure critical because of rural areas tend to have weakest uneven population distribution access to infrastructure and (areas of production remote from markets. main consumption centres: 80% of population concentrated in 20- 30% of the territory) ƒ In these circumstances the participation of poor households tend to be low with a strong role played by middlemen who grasp the largest share of revenues. Extent of current participation: Besides the issues raised in the ƒ In Senegal participation of poor The participation of poor households barriers, trends and future prospects regional scan, some additional households is considered to be in global process is still weak. Main ƒ Indeed, the poor populations are barriers were raised, they include: weak. barriers include: adversely integrated into the ƒ market and power concentration ƒ Feeling that the negative impact ƒ Power concentration at global global markets. ƒ Weak negotiation power is more important than the level and more and more at ƒ through the trade of their positive ones. domestic level.

4 agricultural products ƒ Unfair trade rules ƒ Since 2000, Common External ƒ Weak negotiation power of poor ƒ through their consumption ƒ Small scale production Tariff (CET) considered as one farmers models, which are more and of the principal cause of import ƒ Unfair trade policies (subsidies) more based on values and habits surge (poultry, dairy product, affecting cotton, livestock, alien to local culture refined oil, etc.). For example, groundnut and some vegetable between 1999 and 2002, import like onion Small scale of rural of poultry products increased production from 2117 tons to 16600 tons current trends include: that is more than 780%!!! Causing the closing down of ƒ Producers’ organisation joining 70% of peri-urban poultry small together trough international businesses. coalitions to have a stronger influence on international ƒ Also because of dumping of agenda. ROPPA is therefore refined vegetable oil government gaining stronger regional and only able to buy at guaranteed international power and price, less than 30% of this experience. year’s groundnut production. ƒ Agriculture is not anymore the main income generating sector in many rural areas where new activities are promoted to face vulnerability. In northern and the old groundnut basin (Louga, Diourbel, Kaolack region, and Thies ) migration is the main income generating activity ƒ Cereals have become cash crops; reflecting a new strategy to reduce risk and vulnerability associated with strong dependence on cash crops where prices are very volatile.

5 Prospect ƒ It is likely that migration will remain (for the short and medium run) the main resort in rural Senegal to face poverty. ƒ Urban growth ( it is expected that Senegal urban population will account for 65% in 2020) will increase demand for agricultural products ƒ Combined effect of CET and Economic Partnership Agreements in 2008, will create more vulnerability: regional economy not ready

Perception of the poor on successful New issues raised include: Many initiatives are being taken by Successful participation means participation in global economic ƒ The need for poor households’ to the producers organisations at ƒ Participating in policy processes voice their needs, to have access regional and international levels: formulation at national and to appropriate technologies and ƒ At international levels there is a regional level to define priorities information, and to have the coalition of farmers and according to needs and necessary organisational capacity producers organisations under constraints faced by poor rural the leadership of Via Campesina households. and in January 2006, they have ƒ Having access to the necessary been keys players of the World technology to produce goods that Social Forum held in Mali meet international market ƒ At regional level, cotton requirement producers have linked up with ƒ Having the organisational governments to build a lobby capacity and the negotiation group and have been successful power to engage in international

6 in bringing the West Africa transactions cotton issue in the international ƒ To have access to timely and agenda relevant market information and being able to decide what to produce What assets do poor have access to ƒ In Senegal, migrants (seasonal or Many farmers think that access to The main assets of poor households long term) constitute another financial assets (credit) has been include: asset to be differentiated from made difficult since 1984 when the ƒ Land ƒ Land family labour. New Agricultural Policy (NAP) was ƒ Family labour which is ƒ Family labour adopted as an instrument for the ƒ Also, though not conventional, considered by poor household as ƒ Small equipment implementation state disengagement: the community has also been the driving factor as access to the ƒ Credit referred to as another important Alternative financing systems others (credit, equipment, land) asset, because in period of crisis through micro-finance and traditional often problematic for the poor. the community is seen as an lending mechanisms have been set ƒ Migrants important resource that the up, but are not able to meet all the households can tape into. financing needs or rural households. ƒ Small equipment ƒ Credit Community (social capital) Importance of NFRE Besides migration, the other NFRE ƒ Given the combination of weak In Senegal, main NFRE include: are still weak in most rural areas in national policies, ecological and ƒ Migration Senegal. Recent periods have seen international market constraints, ƒ Tourism ƒ Services (telecommunications) the development of services mainly NFRE will increase in the future. ƒ Services ƒ Craft industry in rural areas for those linked with ƒ Tourism is important in Senegal: the transformation of wild ƒ Migration telecommunications ( telephone 4% of GDP; 12,000 workers and products. Regaining impetus ƒ Craft industry centres) which are closely linked to export earning equivalent of 60% because of difficulty in accessing migration because they allow fishing exports. migrants to keep in close links with credit to acquire equipment ƒ Migration: it accounts for up to families in home country. ƒ Petty trading 52% in households revenues in the peanut basin and 39% in the ƒ Tourism-related activities in the River Valley coastal areas: employment,

7 ƒ Craft industry also very markets for agricultural products. developed with an estimated ƒ Eco-tourism also developing 76,000 units around parks and in Casamance

2.1.2 Distributional issues Key findings from regional scan Views of local stakeholders Comments and analysis New narrative Factors that influence the distribution ƒ Social values and norms. Women and the children are ƒ Social norms (power), level of of benefits and costs at micro-level ƒ Education and access to critical particularly vulnerable. For example access to education and information in many poor households children information, level of connectivity tend to be used as labour for farming with the outside world are Increased participation can lead to a and more and more as beggars in critical factors more equitable resource allocation urban cities, without any between members of the households. ƒ Vulnerable groups such as compensation while missing For example in many parts in women and the children tend to opportunities to go to school. Senegal it has been observed that benefit less. where women were empowered ƒ The head of household (more (trough training, the provision of often adult male) manage the income generating activities, household assets and decides on sensitisation, etc.) their access to key their allocation. He is also the resources such as land has improved. main contact with the outside world (government, NGOs etc.).

Environmental sustainability and In Senegal, experiences include: Environmental sustainability is now ƒ There is a high level of productive strategies ƒ Sustainable agriculture practices in the forefront of the farmers’ awareness both at central and The work carried out in Senegal, with the support of NGOs and organisations agenda in Senegal. local levels regarding Mali, Burkina Faso and Niger to NRM projects: AGRECOL, This is illustrated by the fact that environmental issues.

8 study the transformation of west GREEN Senegal, Enda TM, over the last 10 years, there is a ƒ This is translated into the African agriculture (Reij, et al (pers. ƒ Promotion of local practices strong movement involving NGOs, adoption of NRM policies Com), Toulmin and Gueye, 2003, through local conventions in the farmers, governments and elected emphasising participatory Touré, 2005 and Ouedraogo, 2004) groundnut basin: Projet Bassin people for the promotion of local processes, with poverty-focus challenges the idea that livelihoods Arachidier, Projet Agroforestier, conventions. Moreover, there are IED Afrique ƒ At local level, livelihoods strategies developed by the rural poor many initiatives aimed at linking strategies include: the ƒ The environmental protection of are environmentally unsustainable. local practices and global exploration of farming the Niayes Family farms are multifunctional conventions (on Desertification, techniques that rely less on systems which combines social, ƒ In the peri-urban area of Dakar , ecological biodiversity and climate external inputs, the setting up at cultural, economic and technical pressure on land has given birth change). community level of institutions objectives; the latter dealing mainly to intensification based on the and rules for a sustainable use of with the sustainable use of natural use of organic fertilizers made the local natural resources. resources. Example: Indigeneous soil from manure and urban waste, ƒ In peri-urban areas farming and conservation in Burkina Faso and the adoption of new practices tend to be more which led: increased productivity by varieties. intensive with the adoption of 50%, reduction of migration, reduced new technologies ( organic poverty by 50%, investment in small fertilizers, adoption of new animals, varieties) that allow a sustainable use of local natural resources. Impact of shocks and stresses on Factors of vulnerability include: land In Senegal groups exposed to shocks ƒ Strategies tend be short term, productive strategies of the poor insecurity, lack of labour capacity, and stresses include: landless peri- survival being the priority drought and natural hazards. In the urban dwellers, households headed ƒ Investment in small animals to pastoral areas a major source of by old people without any support, avoid selling critical assets vulnerability is pasture fire pastoralists. (lands, households equipment) ƒ Seasonal migration as common strategy

9 2.1.3; Constraints to participation

Key findings from regional scan Views of local stakeholders Comments and analysis New narrative Institutional and other factors Factors identified in regional scan ƒ Customary tenure regimes The main factor preventing poor preventing poor benefiting seen as relevant. Additional factors predominant households from participating ƒ Low access to education for girls ƒ Women still facing difficulties in include: ƒ Customary tenure regimes in rural areas accessing productive land, ƒ Lack of sound policies (land, mainly because of existing social credit) that specifically target the ƒ Poor access to information ƒ Top-down policy formulation process structures and norms, despite the poor groups. This has been one ƒ market concentration, fact that in the Senegalese of the criticism against the ƒ Lack of policies specifically ƒ Weak negotiation power and legislation, access to land for Senegal PRSP targeting rural women’s needs: weak links to export markets. women is a constitutional right. credit, lands (many rural ƒ Inequitable customary tenure programmes tends to take the ƒ Until recently the land legislation regimes household as a homogeneous did not recognise mobility as a ƒ Weak negotiation power and unit) sustainable NR practice. linkages with export markets ƒ Also existing credit programmes ƒ The low level of education which do not take into account the increases the difficulty for diversity of needs and tend to accessing critical information focus on agriculture-related ƒ Social norms and values which activities only. limit women’s participation in the decision making process

Sequencing issues From discussions with key For example: for groundnut: oil ƒ Market targeting depend mainly stakeholders, it appears that choice of mainly for export, and for domestic on the type of crops: market no often guided by deliberate market, other uses: flour, butter, ƒ Cotton and groundnut target sequencing consideration. Markets roasted, etc. primarily the export market tend to be “specialised”: food crops Cotton: export is priority market (less ƒ Food crops target the local and for domestic markets, cash crops than 5% processed in region) domestic markets with both domestic and international Vegetables: unless engaged in

10 markets segments but differentiated contract farming, poor farmers target ƒ Fruit and vegetable show some according to quality and type of uses local and domestic markets. level of sequencing but priority to domestic markets. Access of poor to global value chains In Senegal, stakeholders think that For example, despite being eligible Improving access to GVCs constraints include: to the AGOA initiative, Senegal has ƒ Increase processing and ƒ Weak processing capacity: for not been able to benefit from it as packaging technology local producers and exporters cannot example less than 5% of West ƒ Improve quality standards African cotton processed in the meet the tough quality standard for ƒ Explore the organic product region primary or processed products for export. market where Senegal has some ƒ Tariff escalation as key comparative advantage (fruit, Some farmers organisations constraint for Senegalese farmers vegetables, meat) to enter export markets. anticipating these difficulties: for example UGPM is training some of ƒ Regulations on quality standards their members in quality certification ƒ Market concentration. techniques, a programme developed ƒ lack of capacity lead most poor by AGRECOL, an NGO working on household enter contract farming organic and bio-agriculture and to rely on middlemen Role of middlemen The same applies to Senegal. Many stakeholders think that most Interaction of poor households with poor rural households in Senegal global economy is weak and work interact with global market through mainly through intermediaries: Interaction of poor households with intermediaries: exporters (fruit, private middlemen, the state. the global economy is very weak in vegetable), the state (main cash crops Different reasons for this: subsidence the Sahelian region and happen such as groundnut and cotton) , agriculture is predominant, public mainly through the state, middlemen importers (foodstuff and inputs), marketing boards still functioning for including domestic private sector NGOs such as OXFAM main cash crops (cotton and (information, advocacy). groundnut), therefore government mediating. Regarding main high value crops, small farmers relying mainly on exporters through contract farming.

11 Trigger for adoption of new Stakeholders think that these triggers ƒ education and technical training Depending on contexts, triggers may technology and barriers are all relevant to the is seen as critical for high value be: education; migration; research Senegalese context vegetable and fruit products for and extension; farmer to farmer export ( need to have adapted exchange; farmer innovations; Triggers vary from one context to varieties, capacity to meet information and Communication another. They can be: European market requirement). Technology ƒ Education ƒ in Senegal, urban markets have The main barriers are: ƒ Migration been a strong trigger for ƒ Cost of technology ƒ Research and extension agricultural intensification ƒ Lack of market opportunities ƒ Farmer to farmer exchange technology in peri-urban where ƒ Complexity of technology ƒ Farmer innovations the combined effect of population pressure and low land ƒ Low education level ƒ Information and availability stimulate innovation. ƒ Inefficient extension service Communication Technology ƒ Reliance on external inputs ƒ Markets

2.1.4: households’ livelihoods strategies

Key findings from regional scan Views of local stakeholders Comments and analysis New narrative Use of innate knowledge and skills to In Senegal, actual examples include: Women’s groups are very active in Actual examples include: participate in global economic ƒ Use of migrants networks in promoting processing and storage ƒ community-based, sustainable processes Europe to channel information food technologies to target both tourism in Senegal to offer and products to European domestic and international markets ( alternative products based on for example, a fast growing export markets cultural exchange market targeting Senegalese migrants ƒ Through their farmers ƒ Many example where migrants in Europe and the USA and focusing organisations build strategic networks act as intermediaries to on the processing of local products: alliances with northern lobbyist develop market opportunities millet, sorghum, fish, wild products ) organisations (River Valley)

ƒ Making most out of the

12 comparative advantage in organic products ( new niche markets for wild products

developed by rural communities: baobab fruit, hibiscus)

Strategies used by the poor The strategies identified during the ƒ Microfinance: a fast growing Livelihoods strategies by which rural household to engage in global regional scan are also relevant for sector in Senegal: more than 11 households can engage with global economic processes Senegal. Other additional strategies billions (CFA francs) credits in economic processes: 1. Sustainable and productive include: 2002. Important for women ƒ Exploring ways in which agricultural practices: economic empowerment: they remittances from migration can benefit 56% of total lending indigenous soil and water ƒ Start first by building strong be better channelled to finance conservation in Burkina Faso regional organisations with ƒ Migration also very important in rural activities . and agricultural negotiation and proposition Senegal: according to Tall, M ƒ Building an international intensification in the peri- capacity to influence rural (2005) the transfers of funds by strategic alliance/coalition of urban area of the Maradi development policies senegalese migrant workers were producers organisations with a District in Niger estimated at 252 billion F CFA ƒ Use the migrants networks in velar agenda for influencing of 2003 according to statistics' of 2. Seasonal and international Europe to seek strategic major global policies (trade and the West Africa Central Bank. migration, a structural partnership with local food food policies) They account for 7% of the GDP livelihood strategy chains engaged in fair trade ƒ Develop technology to add value and 82% of the APD of Senegal, 3. Development of micro- on products through processing, ƒ Explore the extent to which against 6% and 72% respectively finance institutions. packaging and meet international sustainable tourism can be in 2001 and the 1/4 of the budget quality standard to enter EU 4. Strengthening the promoted in support of rural of the State of Senegal. organisational capacities of livelihoods. markets. poor farmers to make their ƒ Institutionalise participatory voice heard. policy analysis and engagement: citizens juries, budget tracking, public hearings, etc;

13 What are key capabilities of rural ƒ Participatory policy analysis Senegalese farmers’ organisations To participate effectively in global poor using approaches such as citizens are amongst the strongest in West processes, poor households need juries, public hearings of policy Africa and play a leading role within technical, political and makers, Participatory policy ROPPA, the regional PO umbrella. methodological capacities. These assessment, etc. Over the last few years, they have include: upgrading production ƒ Negotiation capacity including been very active in developing technology to improve productivity, policy engagement with the State advocacy and lobbying capacities to quality and competitiveness, and international organisations. influence policies. They are now negotiation and proposition capacity, Strategies will include: lobbying engaged in strategic alliances with policy analysis and influence, and advocacy international civil society networking. organisations to influence trade ƒ Technological capacity including Strategies for acquiring them policies at international levels. improved production technology, include: processing and storage Regarding technologies, FONGS is ƒ Link with government and supporting their members to set new ƒ Networking at national, regional, international organisations to set household management schemes and international levels to foster up comprehensive programmes emphasising effective resource mutual learning and create a on poor rural households policy allocation (including the choice of critical mass analysis and engagement the right crops to grow given existing capacity building ƒ Market information collection domestic and international context) ƒ Action plan by ROPPA at and management taking into and budget management. account both domestic and regional level on the same issue international markets

Engagement with local and regional Yes. Regional trade is still very low Many stakeholders support the idea markets Differences: (around 13% in WAEMU) and that local and regional markets Senegal accounting for around 15% should be given priority given the ƒ Non tariff barrier such as of sub-regional trade. Problems that difficulty of entering international standard and quality is less of limit trade between Senegal and the markets. However institutional constraint in domestic markets other sahelian region are relating to constraints (markets and ƒ Market concentration is less infrastructure, lack of infrastructures) limit intra-regional constraining in domestic markets complementarities in rural economies trade. Comparison between domestic for food crops while for cash

14 crops price support still in place (major crops produced in all and international markets show that ƒ Paradoxically because of lack of countries) the size of the local there are some differences : domestic good infrastructures at regional market. Senegal has however some markets facing less non tariff barriers level, product flow is easier with advantages that can potentially and less concentration. international market facilitate the integration in global processes: relatively close to and

good linkages with Europe (from port and airport) Links between different strategies ƒ The remittances from migration These different strategies are in many ƒ The remittances from migration are used to acquire inputs and cases combined in Senegalese rural are used to acquire inputs and equipment households. Depending on the equipment ƒ migration contributes to regions, the importance of these ƒ migration contributes to technological and innovation strategies and the type of technological and innovation mobility combination can vary. For example mobility in the Senegal River Valley ƒ Micro-finance used as an ƒ Micro-finance used an remittances from migration is the alternative to fund consumption alternative to fund consumption main source of financing of rural and productive needs and productive needs activities. ƒ Social capital is critical in times ƒ Social capital is critical in times of crisis; in Senegal and other of crisis; in Senegal and other Sahelian countries solidarity Sahelian countries solidarity remains a strong resort against remains a strong resort against vulnerability vulnerability

How and why do people migrate ƒ Earlier migration waves in the The impact of migration varies ƒ different motivations behind the 1970s and 1980s were mainly depending on household structure. decision to migrate. According to caused by drought/ For example female headed the stakeholders, the most desertification households with no assets such as common reasons are distress, ƒ But the real or apparent relative land and/or adult labour tend to lack of employment well being of migrants has structurally depend on migration opportunities. changed the perceptions: related activities (begging is a ƒ But today, the emphasis is now

15 migration is seen as a long term common example). In other laid on the potential that the livelihood option (not just a households the impact, according to substantial resources drawn from solution to ad hoc crisis). many stakeholders can be positive the migration offer in order to ƒ Other migration are linked with (investment in equipment, food stimulate local development. circumstantial (natural disaster) security, payment of health and ƒ But change in migrants profile or structural distress (lack of school fees) or negative (many while in the 1970 and 1980 assets such as land, labour or people giving the example of migrants were mainly from capital) adoption of new values by migrants) farming background, more people with good education background constitute the majority of new migrants

2.2. HOW CAN THE ENABLING ENVIRONMENT BE ENHANCED TO SUPPORT THE SUCCESSFUL PARTICIPATION OF THE RURAL POOR?

2.2.1. Overarching issues Key findings from regional scan Views of local stakeholders Comments and analysis New narrative Political economy of policy major policy measures that have had ƒ Regarding the Agro-Pastoral ƒ The low economic performance impact on poor livelihoods. These Law, most farmers express the of the Sahelian region is mainly include that the explicit liberal caused by ill-defined policies, 1960-70s: State intervention and the orientation of the current particularly the SAPs which have implementation of large rural government and their inclination led to a drastic reduction in development programmes under the ƒ The New Agricultural Policy towards attracting private public investment in the rural called Integrated Rural Development implemented in 1984 which investment lead to the poor sector. This has also led to a approach. inaugurated state disengagement household dispossessed of the decreasing role of agriculture in from the rural sector. 1980-90s: Structural Adjustment principal asset; that is land. national GDP.( from 20% in the

2 Bosco Ki, Jean (2005). Croissance économique, pauvreté et inégalité au Sénégal. Institut du Nord-Sud

16 Programmes ƒ The launching, in 1995 of the ƒ Moreover many farmers think 1980s to 10% today in Senegal). End of 1990-2000 The new post- Structural Adjustment the (re)distributive effect of most ƒ That is why, though, Senegal’s reform era (MDGs and PRSPs) Programme of the Agricultural of the sector in the AGS is weak. economy has experienced an 2 initiated in the early 2000 does not Sector (PASA) which meant According to Bosko Ki (2005) , average growth rate of 5% since seem to have overcome rural liberalisation of markets a 1 % growth in primary sector the late 1990s, this performance poverty: lack of articulation between ƒ The launching, in 1998 of the in Senegal generates a 1,23 % is not sufficient to address the agricultural policy and the PRSP, Investment Programme for the reduction in poverty against 1,3 poverty challenge. According to weak targeting of the poorest group, Agricultural Sector (PISA) % for the secondary sector and recent estimates, at least a 7 to weak government technical services which inaugurated major shifts in 0,97 % for tertiary. Focusing on 8% annual growth is necessary to to provide support. the extension approach (from (re)distributive growth is reverse the current poverty technology transfer to important because there is sharp trends. The government wants to counselling) by giving farmers inequality in wealth rely on it new AGS to reach that more power in the design of redistribution (richest 20% target and allow the country to research and “extension” ripping off 55% of wealth and meet MDG1 in 2015. 20% only 6% of wealth (Mellali programmes. ƒ Economic vulnerability due to and Gregoire, 2003)7 ƒ The Launching of PRSP in early high economic specialisation: 2000 ƒ All farmers rightly argue that, to fishing and groundnuts. positively impact on rural ƒ And the adoption in 2004, by the ƒ Also worth mentioning, the poverty, public investment National assembly of the Agro- process of reforming the current should target crop production Pastoral Orientation Law decentralisation code to where more than 90% of poor (amongst other changes) ƒ The National Programme on farmers are engaged. Rural Infrastructure launched in reinforces the gender dimension

the early 2000 to address the of the decentralisation. issue of poor rural infrastructure ƒ Also in 2004, the launching of the Accelerated Growth Strategy (AGS) which focus public

7 Mellali Soraya et Luc. J. Grégoire (2003). Communication au forum sur les objectifs du Millénaire pour le Développement en Afrique de l’Ouest. Dakar, Sénégal du 28 au 26 Février 2003. PNUD

17 investment in 5 main areas: tourism, fisheries, telecommunications, agro- industries, and textile. Enabling environment and Potential: Senegal Constraints: Many stakeholders agree that participation ƒ Geographical position: closest ƒ Cost of factors very high: labour, whenever participation has been SSA port/airport to Europe and electricity important, it is because the following conditions or factors were present: the US ƒ Economy not very diversified ƒ Participatory and inclusive ƒ Comparative advantage in terms and export earning drivers of export infrastructure within (tourism, services, phosphates policy formulation process the Sahel and fisheries: est. 50%) with ƒ A good legislative framework ƒ Politically stable smaller redistributive effects than that clearly supports the needs of agriculture the rural poor

ƒ Size of market very small ƒ A good infrastructure base which ƒ Heavy dependence of agriculture allows an easy flows of products, on erratic rainfall and poor soils their processing and storage (50% of cultivated lands) ƒ A good information base to ƒ The lack of a good credit policy allow poor farmers or their has contributed in technology organisations to access critical being obsolete and many poor information on markets farmers unable to renew their equipment or use fertilizers

Evidence of market failures Discussions with stakeholders in ƒ Unfair trade practices has led the There are different types of markets ƒ The degradation of the prices on Senegal brought up new issues decrease of Senegal food self- failures: unfair competition, high the international markets. ƒ Unfair competition sufficiency rate from 138% in transaction costs, inadequate market 1960s to less than 79% in 1999, information system and the fact some Example cotton: ƒ Unequal access to market positive externalities are not ƒ poor infrastructures (road, information ƒ Transactions costs are also often accounted for in price setting. They storage facilities, processing very high and not reflected in ƒ Transaction costs are closely interlinked, therefore

18 facilities), ƒ Externalities price of goods. strong policy measures are needed to ƒ lack of economies of scale, ƒ Inefficient credit system ƒ Regarding positive externalities, lift them. remoteness of markets and sharp the multi-functionality of family fluctuations in supply add to farming, producing marketing costs and reduce environmentally sensitive product competitiveness. agricultural products but, not translated in prices paid to poor farmers. ƒ the cost of credit has become extremely high and does not allow small farmers to engage in long term investment. Global value chains and service In Senegal too these are the main ƒ This year a subsidy of 35 CFA The domestic agro-industrial providers to VCs actors f/kg (out of 150 CFA total price) domestic private sector and trans- was provided to groundnut national corporations (cotton and producers but state only able to fruit and vegetables) are key actors in ƒ Government Main domestic agro-industrial buy 1/3 of production at the global value chains. ƒ The domestic private sector private sector include: subsidised price. Government intervention is still

ƒ The trans-national corporations ƒ In the cotton sector, the French strong for the key export crops such ƒ vegetable and fruit growers, multinational DAGRIS is the groundnuts and cotton but likely to ƒ Processors and/or exporters. major shareholder of diminish with the trends towards Their individual capacity is low SODEFITEX3 and is the major their privatisation(SONACOS4 but they are organised in player linking cotton producers under privatisation) cooperative forms. to global market ƒ Farmers very concerned about ƒ cereals and livestock very poorly the impact of the current linked to global market privatization process of ƒ Trans-national corporations play SONACOS, the public company

3 Société de Développement des Fibres Textiles 4 Société Nationale de Commercialisation des Oléagineux au Sénégal

19 in charge of the groundnut a key role in the high value crops sector. sectors such as vegetables (mainly green beans), fruits and fisheries.

Supply side response to market Senegal like the other Sahelian ƒ It is only cash crops which still Thin input market supply caused by: demand countries face the problem of thin benefit adequate input supply low market potential, depressed input market supply. ƒ In the vegetable sector, in the demand following state disengagement, low prices for cash Throughout the Sahel, thin input Niayes, input supply is part of and food crop which reduces market is a reality. the contract farming package incentive to invest, decreasing ƒ Since the New Agricultural farmers revenues (between 1970 and Policy was implemented, input the end of the 1990, rural producers demand has decreased to a level revenues have fallen by almost 20%). where there is no incentive for private sector ( fertilizers consumption for example has gone down to 10% of what is was 30 yeas ago). Largest proportion of national fertilizer production goes to export market (Mali is main market in sub- region) Main barriers to the market for the ƒ Regarding international market, In the past, to address the issue of Institutional, social and physical poor new non tariff barriers such as scale, cooperatives were set up to factors all account in limiting access health and quality standard, take in charge the marketing of of the poor farmers to global traceability are also stressed products, but in most sahelian markets. These factors are mutually ƒ Infrastructure: road, processing mainly by farmers producing countries these cooperatives have reinforcing because many and storage facilities. vegetables and fruit in the been either dismantled or made stakeholders pointed out, the lack of ƒ Low access to market Niayes. inoperative since the early 1980s, good infrastructure limits the information constitutes also ƒ Lack of a good policy framework with state disengagement. In production capacity of the rural another barrier for households in

20 remote areas has also been pointed out by Senegal, with the New Agricultural poor.. ƒ Social exclusion affects mainly women and pastoralist groups on Policy, this was labelled “ farmers women the ground that policies do not responsibilisation”; meaning target specifically their needs. cooperatives taking over from the

state.

2.2.2. Access to factor markets

Key findings from regional scan Views of local stakeholders Comments and analysis New narrative Successful models for provision of ƒ “Tontines” (traditional saving However, the UGPM is Since the mid 1980s, and the credit to rural poor system) is very widespread experimenting a system that try to withdrawal of the state, access to In Senegal the USAID Programme amongst women’s groups in address these shortfalls: financing by poor farmers has been on “strengthening the microfinance Senegal. ƒ The association borrows from an problematic. To fill the vacuum, sector” helped increase MFI savings ƒ But most stakeholders think that international NGO and lends to microfinance institutions (MFIs) from 2 billion CFA to about 43 micro-finance does not provide a its members have been developed and Senegal’s one is the most dynamic in west billion CFA and the number of loans sustainable, long term response ƒ Both investment and Africa. But MFI face some constraint made by MFIs each year, from to the credit crisis, unless their consumption credit provided 11,580 to 76,342 between 2001 and major shortfalls are addressed: relating to low scale, short term and ƒ Large amount to allow 2004 enables MFIs to offer credit small amount, short term, high high cost of credit. investment in equipment: and savings products to thousands interest rate. Some rural organisations are draught animal, horse chart, etc. more rural and urban entrepreneurs, developing alternative systems to particularly women. ƒ Interest keep at a reasonable overcome these shortfalls. level: 6% for investment credit

ƒ Social control allows high pay-

back rate (nearly 100%)

21 Importance of land reform ƒ Most stakeholders stress the fact ƒ Senegal in a process of drafting a Land ins the main asset for poor that land is the main asset for the new land reform. household and land security for Land indeed constitutes the principal poor. Experience has shown that, ƒ First draft withdrawn from the vulnerable groups, including women resource of the poor rural it is difficult to escape the Agro-Pastoral Law, due to strong and pastoralists is a key condition to households.. poverty trap once the poor loose opposition by farmers promote investment, economic their lands. organisations. power, and conflict prevention. There are several problems that need However security does not necessary ƒ A good land reform provides ƒ Farmers concerns are relating to to be tackled in order to secure the mean formal title. A good land livelihoods of the poor households: incentive for the poor to invest in the risk that the current official reform should combines flexibility, technology and improve rhetoric about agricultural context-specificity, anchorage in ƒ rapid growth of Sahelian towns agricultural productivity modernisation leads to high good local practices and values. is accompanied by heavy ƒ A gender sensitive land reform value land being privatised. Senegal is engaged in the pressure on land. reinforces women’s economic ƒ But general consensus on the formulation of a new land reform. Its ƒ areas of high agricultural power and potential to participate need for a new reforms but sharp chance of it being successful will potential increasingly attract new in economic processes agricultural entrepreneurs, difference in views regarding depend on the extent to which key known as “new actors” ƒ In pastoral areas, mobility can be content. stakeholders have been involved. increasing competition. sustained only if a good land Unfortunately, most rural ƒ In areas used for herding, the legislation secures access to organisations feel excluded from the moving of the boundaries of pasture and water points process which is mainly conducted agricultural areas is leading an alongside transhumance corridor by technical experts increase in conflicts ƒ In high potential areas (Niayes, River Valley, peri-urban) a good

land reform can also protect poor households from land dispossession by powerful lobby groups.

2.2.3. Processes

22 Key findings from; regional scan Views of local stakeholders Comments and analysis New narrative Migration as a distress or In Senegal, different types of ƒ It is very important to stress the State support to migrants might accumulation strategy migrations exist regional differences regarding include. ƒ Most of Sahelian countries are ƒ Long term international migration. While in the ƒ Setting up of social protection rather characterized by a high migration is seen as an exit Ziguinchor, Fatick and part of schemes for migrants to facilitate level of out-migration. strategy out of agriculture Thies and Dirourbel regions their access to basic needs ƒ Senegal has also in its border seasonal migration involve both ƒ In-country seasonal migration is (health, water and education) with Mauritania thousands of men and women, in the northern usually a response to short term ƒ Facilitate access to credit for refugees. Resettlement regions (Saint-Louis, Matam and livelihoods needs migrants who wants to invest in programmes have been taking Louga, it is mainly men who are place to secure access to agriculture or other productive ƒ In-country long term migration involved. productive resources such as land with 3 major national activities ƒ Also in many case seasonal and to these persons but it appears in destinations: Dakar, Mbour ƒ Set up an enabling legal long term in-country migrations all these cases that short term (tourism) and Touba, a religious environment to facilitate solutions do not work. are seen as transient, as the town, second largest urban experiences of “decentralised ultimate objective is always agglomeration in Senegal with cooperation” linking migrants international migration highest growth rate organisations in Europe and

ƒ Ad-hoc migration exist in some European organisations to cases and is caused by natural develop joint programmes in the disaster as in 2004 with the communities of origins of locust invasion or by structural migrants. Many experiences of vulnerability (poor households this kind are developing in without young adults and/or with Senegal many children which they engage in begging) Are rules of the games accessible to Most stakeholders support that the • globalisation displaces the the rural poor? rules of the games are not assimilated decision centre from national to in local markets. international levels. Many representatives of farmers organisations give the example of crop price setting where

23 government has not control over it let alone poor farmers. • human and social capitals remain weak in rural areas: low level of education to engage in global interactions, weak access to critical information, weak negotiation power of rural communities, lack of inclusive national policy process and control of the governance of global process by trans-nationals Importance of institutional factors Key institutional factors: Rural institutions such as information Importance of institutional factors ƒ Markets systems, extension services, ƒ Improve technology infrastructures, markets and credit ƒ Education system ƒ Provide incentive to invest and systems allow poor farmers to invest Improve agricultural productivity ƒ Information system in technology to improve both ƒ Organisational capacity of quality and productivity of ƒ Develop a strong human capital poor rural households agricultural. They also contribute in to support the transformations of the rural economy ƒ Extension services reducing transaction costs and improving competitiveness. ƒ Reduce transaction costs However long term transformation of ƒ Raise farmers revenues through rural economies will largely depend more market efficiency on a good education system ƒ more equitable distribution of benefits by allowing vulnerable groups to access empowering services (education, credit, information) Support for enterprise development Different institutional mechanisms Despite these initiatives, there are The Senegalese business Like other countries in Africa , the have been set up to support some constraining factors to environment provides both enterprise development (mentioned opportunities and constraints.

24 Sahelian region faces a unfavourable enterprise development: in previous section) Regarding opportunities, there are business environment because of ƒ APIX is the agency in charge of ƒ High costs of production factors initiatives being taken by the very small domestic markets, long government to improve the business. attracting Direct Foreign ƒ Procedures: According to the administrative procedures, high cost Also farmers themselves promote Investment and promoting WB, Senegal ranks 132 out 155 of production factors like electricity investment through trade fairs. and telecommunications, poor exports countries on “easiness of starting Moreover the new Agro-Pastoral transportation system including air ƒ There also exist an agency for a business: 9 procedures over 57 Law formally recognises farming as freight, corruption. All these the promotion of agricultural days against 6,5 and 9,5 for a profession which should benefit the problems, whose level of severity products exports, providing OECD. However Senegal same advantages as the formal sector varies from one country to another, information and advice to performs better than other WA (insurance, retirement, and other result in high production cost, hence producers engaged in high value francophone countries lack of competitiveness. The social protection mechanisms) niches (vegetables, fruit, flowers) ƒ Inefficient credit system: situation is particularly critical in However there are some constraints landlocked countries like Burkina ƒ Over the last few years Senegal conditions set by commercial that need to be addressed: factor Faso, Mali and Niger who depend on has also been regularly banks difficult to be met costs, procedures, lack of a the neighbouring coastal states both organising its international ƒ Thin market supportive credit system, think to export and import goods. agriculture fair in Paris Therefore the flow of foreign direct ƒ Rampant corruption market. ƒ The International Agriculture investment in the region has been and Livestock Fair a large yearly low compared to other developing countries. However the stable sub-regional event pioneered by political environment which the Senegalese producers characterizes all the 5 countries organisations is also an (despite a recent military coup in opportunity for small producers Mauritania) should be stressed as through their organisations to being a key factor in contributing in build partnership developing private business in these countries.

Support for sustainable resource According stakeholders the Overall there is a very high utilisation Senegalese government has put a ƒ But for policies to be sustainable awareness both at government and strong emphasis on environmental community levels regarding the

5 Comité Inter-Etat de Lutte contre la Sécheresse au Sahel

25 ƒ strong emphasis on sustainable sustainability they need to be informed by needs for sustainable natural resource natural resource management in ƒ A new policy approach linking good practices. management. At government level, the Sahel poverty reduction and natural ƒ Also, though NRM is a this is translated into a new policy ƒ To develop coordinated actions, resource management developed decentralised competency in framework with link poverty to 5 NRM. Also the new Agro-Pastoral they set up, 1973, the CILSS ƒ Local government playing Senegal, local governments lack Law explicitly recognizes pastoral which has been very influential stronger role in NRM ( Natural the skills and the financial mobility as a sustainable NRM in the 198s et 1990s by focusing Resource Management is 1 of the capacities to fulfil their mandate, practice their actions on setting up a 9 competencies so far transferred leaving the sate to remain the key drought early warning system, a from central to local driver for policies At community level, local food security strategy and also governments) ƒ Local practices, through local conventions based on community land tenure policies supporting of practices are being supported by ƒ Adoption of participatory natural conventions, being mainstreamed sustainable NRM. But CILSS local governments, NGOs and NRM resource management by most at community level currently face decreased programmes. Also, through NRM programmes operational capacity. decentralisation, local governments are key decision makers regarding NRM.

2.2.4. Government support Key findings from; regional scan Views of local stakeholders Comments and analysis New narrative How can government support ƒ Actions identified in the regional Many rural organisations feel that Additional government support participation? scan are relevant to Senegal there is a lack of systematic ƒ Setting up a participatory policy according to stakeholders. consultation and discussions between formulation process by providing However, the likelihood of poor them and the government. Some of ƒ Promoting decentralisation and more room for rural farmers participating them even think that the relationship local governance. organisations to voice their ideas successfully strongly depends on is rather odd. This is illustrated by and participate in decision ƒ Providing extension and advisory changing the rules that govern the fact in recent years some of the making services. global markets: in particular programmes initiated by the ƒ Support farmers organisation ƒ Facilitating access to education limiting import subsidies and the government did not meet the positive capacity building, particularly on and health services. limitation of power approval by many producer issues such as advocacy, and concentration, organisations who expressed policy analysis

26 concerns about both the process and ƒ Develop a strong policy the content. orientation and support service on quality and standard and strengthen poor households’

capacity to internalize. ƒ Develop a national market information system focusing both on domestic and international markets ƒ Set up a comprehensive rural financing system focusing not only on production, but also providing support for the export of some high value products where poor farmers are suffering from their dependence on the private sector (contract farming) delivery of services to the rural poor ƒ Many stakeholders think that the In 1998, Senegal initiated a new Level of access to extension, health role of research has decreased Investment Programme for the and education services varies from over the years because of the Agricultural Sector. This reform has one region to another. The remote decrease in resource allocation led the setting up of a new approach region of Tambacounda and Kolda as both from the government and in extension focusing on counselling well as the Ferlo zone (pastoral area) the bilateral and multilateral rather than conventional technology has the weakest access to health, donors. transfer, through the creation of the education and roads (Kolda: ƒ Even though Senegal has the National Agency for Agricultural and accessibility index 0-50 against a 6 highest education and health Rural Counselling (ANCAR) . This maximum of 400-500). On the other standards in the Sahel, access is new approach is accompanied also hand , region in the western belt have by the strengthening of the a better access to these services. That

6 Agence Nationale de Conseil Agricole et Rural

27 still problematic in some regions. producers’ organisations which are is many stakeholders talk about a Nearly 40% of population live the second largest shareholder of the policy paradox. Indeed while policies more that 5 km away from an ANCAR. Therefore they have their claim to focus on poverty reduction, health centres Moreover, the say in the design of the extension the poorest regions benefit less from gender discrimination remains services which are demand-led public investment. For example high ( rate of illiteracy amongst Regarding health and education, around 60% of public investment in women is 77% against national since 2004, the government has made the agricultural go the River Valley average of 53% ) an important move by allocating 40% which represent only 10% of ƒ Regarding school primary school of the national budget to education agricultural land. enrolment the rate has increased and 10% to health. However despite from 69% in 1989 to 88% in this effort, some regions ( 2003 Tambacounda and Kolda in particular) still face difficult access to education and health services. how global markets are changing Most rural producers think that the . ƒ More concentration meaning less implementation of EPA in 2008 power to local and national constitutes a major threat for the bodies economies of all African countries; ƒ New non tariff barrier focusing small farmers not ready to engage in on standards and quality, competition with European farmers difficult to meet by small farmers even in case of the lifting of ƒ The lifting of all trade barriers in subsidies 2008 with the implementation of the Economic Partnership Agreements (EPA) between the EU and ACP ( Cotonou Agreement) ƒ The implantation of ECOWAP (ECOWAS Common Agricultural Policy) meaning the

28 need for national agricultural Policies to meet regional requirement ƒ The development of substitutes is a threat for some strategic crops in Senegal: Cotton and groundnut oil in particular

4 SUMMARY A brief summary on what are held to be the most important economic processes in the global (or simply international) environment that impact upon poverty - both as threat and opportunity - in the country concerned. Global economic processes in this context include migration, trade and investment, including changes in domestic markets, access to factors of production and resource use that can be attributed to global processes.

Table 1. The most important global economic processes in the international environment for Senegal and their impact on the rural poor (negative and positive)

Process The rural poor as: Producers & Collectors Workers (Ag, Non-ag but Traders Migrants (seasonal, Consumers (Ag and Non-ag) rural, Non-ag but urban) permanent, national, international) Market ƒ Weak or no Wages in rural sector will ƒ Weak or negotiation Importance of imported concentration negotiation power be influenced by prices paid power good in diet ƒ Price takers for agricultural products ƒ Act as appendices of ƒ Instability of transnational prices/revenues given corporations limited government ƒ No or weak capacity support to enter international markets ƒ Increasing concentration in domestic markets

29 will also limit participation of rural traders Subsidies and ƒ Non competitiveness ƒ Decreasing ƒ Lower margins from ƒ Crisis of agricultural ƒ Cheap imported food import surge ƒ Low price for food employment marketing local sector increases rural out- (ex. Poultry and rice): crops opportunities products migration positive impact on urban household ƒ No incentive to invest ƒ Wages tend to be low ƒ Shrinking markets for ƒ More farmers moving out budget in technology ( low ƒ Employment local products of the rural sector due to productivity) opportunity in growing non competitiveness and ƒ Health risks migrate ƒ Revenue decreasing food import sector ƒ New consumption ƒ Tenure insecurity for new habits ƒ Business closing ƒ rural to rural migrants (poultry, dairy and livestock)

Non tariff barriers ƒ Limited access to ƒ Opportunity for setting Very limited May be tempted to focus (quality and global markets, or of domestic opportunities. The rural on food crop for own health standards) ƒ Increased dependence certification companies will rely on middlemen consumption on domestic private ƒ Opportunities for because of lack of own sector through processing, storage and technology to meet contract farming to packaging standards meet Eu standards ƒ Some organizations On the other hand, this ƒ May shift from export taking up the new might, leave space for oriented crop to food opportunities: UGPM rural traders in domestic crop and AGRECOL setting markets since products cannot be exported ƒ May target domestic up a new rural market only. profession on quality certification.

Biotechnology ƒ Indigenous gene bank Very limited opportunities ƒ Increased food (GMO) at risk as international BT dependency ƒ Dependency on BT companies will set up ƒ Uncertainties trans-nationals for their own distribution regarding impact of

30 seeds and fertilizers chains in partnership local health ƒ BT competing with private sector or research local products institutions.

Economic ƒ Competitiveness loss ƒ New opportunities ƒ Cheaper imported Partnership ƒ Likelihood of with new products food Agreements revenues decreasing that enter the rural ƒ Imported food in (2008) at least in first years markets consumption ƒ Increased structure may vulnerability increase ƒ Health and quality issues will be important

Impact of ƒ Low productivity ( no Increase in lands farmed Decrease in marketing If farming non competitive, Loss of biodiversity: less globalization and access to credit) may provide employment opportunities for wild tend to migrate access to non ag. Forest liberalization on ƒ More land to be opportunities products product: leave, fruits, natural resources farmed (issue of medicinal plants access) Impact on health, ƒ More labor needed nutrition, domestic use

Based on the central issues of: • how can the rural poor engage in global economic processes; • how do the rural poor currently engage in global economic processes; • what are the constraints to more and better engagement; • what are the appropriate policy interventions to support successful engagement; and • AND highlight instances where the findings from our secondary empirical analysis in the Regional Scan are perceived differently by people dealing with the issue as policy-makers, representatives of the poor, practitioners, researchers, etc).

31 Based on this summary we move to the research themes.

3 PROPOSED RESEARCH ISSUES OR THEMES (3-5 PAGES)

4 VALIDATION OF REGIONAL RESEARCH THEMES

The research context: The country investigation will check that the information on existing relevant research work in the Regional Scan is broadly correct (i.e. that we haven't missed a huge volume of relevant research activity from a particular type of institution). Discussions with the major research organizations will highlight their likely research agenda 2006 to 2010. Current and likely future research ‘gaps’ will be confirmed.

Testing the proposed research themes: Discussions with a broad range of stakeholders will provide an opportunity to 'ground truth' the research themes identified in the Regional Scan to refine and prioritise them and highlight research method issues. These discussions will identify of potential future partners to participate in a future research agenda with IDRC (both as potential producers and co-financiers of research)

32 Research groups actually or potentially working on Evaluation and prioritization of theme by the theme ; organisations Call for criteria in Inception Report (including their Views on theme of implementing action or Theme Proposal alignment with the main findings in Section stakeholders awaiting recommendation; modalities¹ 2) and, organizations actually or potentially financing research in this area.

1 • Very severe environmental vulnerability • Decentralization process of rural households in the Sahel under way in the • Due to international pressure, NRM is different countries back in the regional and national policy provides a good context agenda Impact of market to influence national • LASDEL (Niger) • Despite this, it is the resource-riche areas NRM policies liberalization and • ENDA Global and are the most vulnerable (lack of • Major concerns by globalization on local • CRDI regional infrastructure and good policies) farmers regarding the natural resources and on • IIED CA$400,000 • Due to structural inequalities, the fact that many Sahelian poor households Jan 07 ratification of international conventions countries pledge for • IED Afrique livelihoods did not really impact of poor access of agri-business poor people to NR development which • Liberalization of environmental good might have adverse open the door to over-exploitation effect ton the environment

2 • Focus should be on how • OMI • Lack of efficient use of local natural these revenues can fund • AFRISTAT (Bamako) resources is a key factor in pushing investment, given the • CODESRIA Global Globalization, young people out of rural areas current difficult access IFAN: Dakar international migration • Due to global processes, integration of to credit • CA$250,000 • IRD and financing local international market is the main objective • Also analyze how these Sept. 06 • Ministère des development in Sahel • Heavy reliance of rural households on revenues can fund migrants remittance community-based social Sénégalais de l’Extérieur • protection schemes • Put emphasis too on

33 regional migration and how it farming practices

3 • ETC Netherlands • Free University of • Sharp decrease in public investment to Amsterdam, rural sector, following SAP (government Netherlands Supporting farmer failure) • IIED UK innovation and • Strong farmer to farmer exchange Outsiders’ knowledge, like • IED Afrique Regional experimentation to throughout the Sahel, due to ecological technology, has a costs that • NARs in Senegal, address government continuity the poor cannot pay, Burkina and Mali CA$550,000 failure in providing • Environmental sustainability therefore importance to • IFAD Dec. 06 support to improve rural • This reduces dependency to external value their knowledge • ICRISAT Niger technology inputs and financial resources • ILRI • In many cases high productivity increase, • IUCN therefore more revenues • GRET

4 • Decrease of primary sector contribution to GDP and increase of NFRE’s • Many NFRE have direct impact on natural resources (rural handcraft, rural ƒ CRAT Non Farm Revenues and fuel wood markets, Research issues on: to what ƒ IUCN livelihoods • Remoteness of production areas main Regional extent NFRE constitutes an ƒ CRDI diversification strategies from consumption centers CA$300,000 alternative to formal credit to ƒ of the rural poor in the • Crisis in cash crops production (prices, USAID fund rural activities Feb. 07 Sahel dumping, etc.) • Offer new niches for economic participation for the poor ( craft industry, eco-tourism, etc.)

• Current trade rules put food • What are the impacts or • ENDA 5 Trade, food security and Global security/sovereignty at risk import subsidies on the • CILSS

34 poverty reduction in the • Sahelian countries depend on food livelihoods of poor • WAEMU CA$350,000 Sahel imports households? • ECOWAS Mar. 07 • Import surge ( dairy, poultry, etc.) put • To what extent, the new • IFAD local agricultural sector at risk legislation under • OXFAM • No incentive for poor household to invest preparation can provide • Action Aid Afrique to improve productivity, therefore the new legal tools to • CREA Nairobi expand areas under cultivation which prevent the subsidies • VECO accelerates resource degradation. • How to take advantage

• Economic Partnership Agreements will of new opportunities increase the vulnerability of local food such eco-tourism to crops. improve the livelihood of the poor?

6 • Livestock sector in the Sahel severely hit Important to address issues by subsidies and dumping (chicken cuts, relating to: • IIED dairy products, etc.) • Infrastructures in • IED Afrique Globalization and the • Livestock contributes major share in Regional pastoral areas • ILRI future or pastoral GDP (18% in Mauritania; 8% in Global • Policies to limit • CSE economy in the Sahel Senegal) dumping • CIRAD (PPZS) CA$200,000 • Economic survival of pastoral communities dependant on national • NARs policies 7 Documenting and institutionalizing • All sahelian countries face low successful rural agricultural productivity • Financing agricultural • FONGS Regional financing systems (non • Agriculture is the key driver for poverty development critical for • ROPPA based on remittances) to reduction CA$ participation in • USAID improve poor • Competitiveness of Sahelian agriculture 450,000 economic processes • VECO households agricultural is strongly influenced by level of • PAMECAS Dec. 06 performance and productivity participation to market • processes

35 8 • Dominant neo-liberal view leading to Research should the privatization of key assets such as lands • UNIFEM Securing access to key emphasis on looking at how Regional assets (land, finance) by • Structural inequalities prevent women traditional knowledge and • Plateforme from accessing key resources: land and • AFARD CA$ women to improve their practices relating to land labor • CODESRIA participation in global management can be 200,000 • Negative externalities of agro-business: • IDRC economic processes. safeguarded.. Feb. 07 environmental degradation • IFPRI • 9 • Comparative advantage of Sahelian • Taking into consideration: medicinal Domestic and countries • IUCN Global plants, wild fruits, international market • Emerging international niche markets for • IDRC Regional opportunities for wild wild/natural products • Issues of access and • AGRECOL CA$275,00 products for sustainable • Women are key players in this niche control of resources

rural livelihoods markets (source of economic critical Ap. 07 empowerment) 10 • Most sahelian poor farmers sell primary products • Poor farmers have the lowest share of Quality assurance and rural products value • Very important to Regional farmers processing of local food • High potential for increasing share • IDRC • Women very active in CA$ crops to improve market through value addition to primary • ITA Senegal processing and trading. 600,000 domestic and products • CRAT Therefore potential for Feb.07 international • May result in higher economic incentive AGRECOL improving their • opportunities to invest in production technology • Local cereals uncompetitive against rice economic autonomy. partly because of weak processing

36 4 PROPOSED CALL FOR PROPOSALS

Impact of market liberalization and globalization on local natural resources and on poor households’ livelihoods

A call for proposals Introduction

The International Development Research Centre (IDRC) through its Rural Poverty and Environment Programme Initiative (RPE), announces the launching of a new grant to support innovative research proposals focusing on the theme: Impact of market liberalization and globalization on local natural resources and on poor households’ livelihoods. The RPE’s mission is to contribute to the development of networks, partnerships and communities of practices, in order to strengthen institutions, policies and practices that enhance the food, water and income security of the poor, including those living in fragile or degraded uplands and coastal ecosystems. The objective of this research is to contribute in improving the productive strategies for poor households to participate successfully in the global economic process.

Context

Sahelian people depend on natural resources for their livelihoods. But, the region has been facing severe environmental crises over the last four decades. In just one Sahelian country, forest cover loss is as high as 80,000 ha per year. Unfortunately, despite international conventions (Convention to Combat Desertification, Convention on Biological Diversity and Convention on Climate Change), current natural resource management practices in many places remain unsustainable. This situation results from the combination of many factors. First, structural adjustment policies and market liberalisation have resulted in government disengaging from the rural sector. In such circumstances, the poor households have not been able to have access to credit to invest in technology to improve agricultural productivity. The only response most farmers have adopted, has been to expand areas under cultivation to avoid decreasing revenues. This strategy has been developed at the expenses of environmental sustainability and has in many cases accelerated rural migration and conflicts. Second, because of the decreasing prices of main crops due to international market, it is likely that this pressure over the natural resources will increase, if poor farmers want to avoid a worsening of their livelihood conditions. Third, it has been noticed that, in high potential areas, many Sahelian governments tend to give priority to private investors who want to invest in high value export crops for the global markets (River Valley in Senegal). In many cases this results in poor rural households being dispossessed of their lands. At the same time recent studies have shown that these agro-businesses adopt unsustainable agricultural practices et it very likely that they increase environmental degradation.

The objective of this call for proposal is to select innovative research proposals that will carry out in- depth research to assess the impact of market liberalisation on local natural resources and on poor rural households’ livelihoods, to identify key policy actions to be implemented. The research should clearly spell out the impact of these policy actions on the livelihoods of the poor and their participation on the global economic processes.

37 Key research questions :

ƒ What are the domestic and global market forces and how do they interact with local natural resources? ƒ Why, despite the different international conventions, and the strong focus on participatory natural resource management, rural poverty remain very high ? ƒ How do liberalisation affect access by the poor the key natural resources and the productive strategies of the poor? ƒ Who are the winners and losers amongst rural stakeholders ƒ How effective have policy responses been to address environmental degradation ƒ What policies and practices are needed to allow poor households benefiting from the natural resource base? ƒ To what extent poor rural communities have been able to develop innovative response to address the impact of globalisation of the natural resources?

Eligibility.

ƒ Applicant can be individuals or institutions and must demonstrate strong research capacity ƒ Research methods should combine both qualitative and quantitative approaches ƒ The research proposals should clearly demonstrate how the poor households livelihoods can be improved and provide operational policy guidelines for implementation ƒ Research budget should not exceed CA$400,000

Selection process

Interested applicants are invited to submit a concept note (between 1400 et 1500 words) specifying the research location, scope of the research, approaches and methods, key activities, expected outputs, tentative timetable, and estimated budget. Applicants whose concept notes are short listed will be asked to develop a more detailed proposal. Concept note should be submitted no later than January lst , 2007

38 Globalization, international migration and financing of local development in Sahel

A call for proposals Introduction

The International Development Research Centre (IDRC) through its Rural Poverty and Environment Programme Initiative (RPE), announces the launching of a new grant to support innovative research proposals focusing on the theme: Globalization, international migration and financing of local development in the Sahel . The RPE’s mission is to contribute to the development of networks, partnerships and communities of practices, in order to strengthen institutions, policies and practices that enhance the food, water and income security of the poor, including those living in fragile or degraded uplands and coastal ecosystems. The objective of this research is to contribute in improving the productive strategies for poor households to participate successfully in the global economic process.

Context.

Since the 1970s, and even before, the Sahel region has been facing cyclical severe droughts. In many rural areas, strategies developed to address these problems were based on diversification to reduce vulnerability. Migration, has over the times the become one of the most common strategy. There are different types of migrations: seasonal or long term, national, regional or international. In the beginning, migration was just seen as a strategy to face ad hoc crises and distress, but today for most migrants, it is seen as a structural livelihood option or an alternative economic option to agriculture. Remittances from agriculture lay therefore a key role for sustaining livelihoods in rural areas in the Sahel. In a country like Senegal, the transfers of funds by senegalese migrant workers were estimated at 252 billion F CFA of 2003 according to statistics of the West Africa Central Bank. They account for 7% of the GDP and 82% of the APD of Senegal, against 6% and 72% respectively in 2001 and the 1/4 of the budget of the State of Senegal (Tall, 2005). However, it has been noticed that most these resources were used mainly to cover households consumption needs and in house building, except in very few cases, for example in the Senegal River (Mali and Senegal) region where migrants are investing in productive assets (land, equipment) and are supporting community-driven economic activities. The debate today is how these good examples can be scaled out. Indeed, because of the liberalisation policies, poor farmers are unable to access to credit and to invest in improved agricultural technologies. But as the same time, their access to basic social services (health, education) have become problematic too. Therefore, it is necessary to explore ways by which remittances from international migration can support the setting up of indigenous, community-based and sustainable rural financing systems (credit, social security, etc) to support the livelihoods of the poor. But the issue goes beyond supporting local development initiatives and takes also in to account, the necessity of providing migrants with opportunities to engage in productive investments, to anticipate future trends. Indeed, the future of West African internation migration in a globalized knowledge-led society, is now feeding debate in the region.

The objective of this call for proposal is to select innovative research proposals that will carry out a participatory action research drawig from existing experiences and involving key stakeholders (community, migrants, policy makers, civil society organisation, donors, etc.) in order to set up innovative community-driven financing systems based on a new channelling of remiitances from international migration.

39

Research questions

ƒ What are the threats and opportunities of current international context on the future of international migration? ƒ How important are remittances and what is the potential for their mobilisation to fund local development initiatives? ƒ What experiences of migrants investing in supporting economic local and social development exist and what are their strengths and weaknesses? ƒ How to build on these experiences? ƒ What policies are needed to support the proposed new initiatives or systems.

Eligibility.

ƒ Only institutions with solid capacity in participatory research, policy analysis and policy can submit proposals ƒ Prior experience in working on migration issues useful ƒ The research proposals should clearly demonstrate how the poor households livelihoods can be improved and provide operational policy guidelines for implementation ƒ Research budget should not exceed CA$250,000

Selection process

Interested applicants are invited to submit a concept note (between 1400 et 1500 words) specifying the research location, scope of the research, approaches and methods, key activities, expected outputs, tentative timetable, and estimated budget. Applicants whose concept notes are short listed will be asked to develop a more detailed proposal. Concept note should be submitted no later than September 1st, 2006

40 Supporting farmer innovation and experimentation to address government failure in providing support to improve rural technology

A call for proposals

Introduction

The International Development Research Centre (IDRC) through its Rural Poverty and Environment Programme Initiative (RPE), announces the launching of a new grant to support innovative research proposals focusing on the theme: Supporting farmer innovation and experimentation to address government failure in providing support to improve rural technology. The RPE’s mission is to contribute to the development of networks, partnerships and communities of practices, in order to strengthen institutions, policies and practices that enhance the food, water and income security of the poor, including those living in fragile or degraded uplands and coastal ecosystems. The objective of this research is to contribute in improving the productive strategies for poor households to participate successfully in the global economic process.

Context

Structural adjustment programmers and the liberalization of the agriculture sector, have major negative impacts on agricultural performance in the Sahel, as they resulted in government withdrawing its support to poor rural farmers who were therefore unable to invest in agriculture. Though most farmers responses have been to increase land under cultivation, others have invested in tapping into local knowledge and practices to generate sustainable innovations and technologies. Indigenous soil and water conservations technologies developed by farmers in the central plateau of Burkina Faso are famous examples. But there are many others innovations that have proved to be effective. They include: agricultural intensification in peri-urban areas and in rural areas where land pressure has been high, local conventions based on endogenous practices in natural management, adoption of new fruit trees varieties where domestic or international market incentives exist, processing technologies to add value, etc. In many cases theses technologies have helped improved agricultural or livestock productivity with little or reliance on external inputs. In a context of liberalization and globalization where access to credit is difficult, where existing alternative financing systems (micro-finance) do not adequately respond to farmers needs and where continuing depressing world prices do not provide incentive to invest on external inputs, more attention should be given to sustainable agriculture practices to address government failure and respond to pressure from global markets.

The objective of this call is to select innovative research proposals which will help identify sustainable farmer innovations or technologies that have had a major impact on households economic performance and livelihoods; to evaluate them and to develop mechanisms by which farmer to farmer knowledge transmission can be developed. A particular emphasis should be put on the policy actions needed to support and institutionalise these innovations and processes.

Critical methodological issues

ƒ Identification, characterisation and evaluation of innovations ƒ Impact of innovations on households economic performance

41 ƒ Potential impact in improving poor households participation in economic processes ƒ Factors of sustainability and reproducibility ƒ Policy implications

Eligibility.

ƒ Applicant can be individuals or institutions and should demonstrate strong research capacity ƒ Capacity in Participatory Technology Development useful ƒ The research proposals should clearly demonstrate how the poor households livelihoods can be improved and provide operational policy guidelines for implementation ƒ The research proposal should demonstrate how the innovations contribute in improving the participation of poor households in global economic processes ƒ Research budget should not exceed CA$550,000

Selection process

Interested applicants are invited to submit a concept note (between 1400 et 1500 words) specifying the research location, scope of the research, approaches and methods, key activities, expected outputs, tentative timetable, and estimated budget. Applicants whose concept notes are short listed will be asked to develop a more detailed proposal. Concept note should be submitted no later than December 1st, 2006

42