Sam Chema, E. Gilbert, Johannes Roseboom, Chema, Sam · 6 authors
This study reviews the ongoing reforms of national agricultural research systems (NARS) in sub-Saharan Africa. The study not only takes stock of the principal reform themes (i.e., a redefinition of the role of government, decentralization, stakeholder participation, new financing mechanisms, and system linkages), but also highlights the underlying ideas and concepts that shape the present NARS reform agenda. NARS reform details are illustrated and discussed in seven case-study countries: Côte d'Ivoire, Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Senegal, Tanzania, and Uganda. While there is considerable consensus about the main trends, there are major differences and disputes on specific aspects of the reform agenda. Moreover, NARS reforms alone will not close the technological divide between Africa and the rest of the world—they are to be seen as part of a far broader modernization agenda.
The studies and cases reviewed by the authors suggest that settlement programs are too often designed on the assumption that all settlers will or can succeed. This had led to too much centralized administration and rigid designs, rather than reliance on decentralized approaches, flexibility in implementation, support for spontaneous settlement, and reliance on the settler's own investment capacity. Collective forms of crop production have not worked. Cropland is best allocated to individual families whose land rights must be clearly defined as ownership or long-term leases. Farm sizes must be flexibly adjusted to skills, the availability of family labor, and the families'capital ownership. Settlers should therefore be allowed to sell or rent the land to other beneficiaries. If poor settlers are to benefit or succeed, settlement cannot be based on credit finance but must include grants. Paternalistic constraints on the choice of crops or technologies, marketing, or participation in the labor force have usually not been enforceable or have had negative effects.
China's current reform program in agriculture is enormously ambitious in intent and highly significant for all aspects of future economic and political development. It represents a rejection of past policies of large-scale labor mobilization and communal self-reliance in favor of commercialization and individual incentives for peasants. Diversification of the rural economy, decentralization of farm management, production specialization, crop selection in accord with comparative advantage, expansion of free markets, release of labor from the land, and a shift toward household-based, rather than collective, cultivation have all been important elements of the new line. The resultant explosion of pent-up rural entrepreneurship, fueled also by marked state procurement price rises, produced dramatically positive effects on overall productivity, peasant incomes, and standards of living. These led to widespread introduction of even more radical reforms. The recent agricultural boom will be difficult to sustain, however, without worsening China's already serious budget and finance crisis. Today's leadership coalition also faces intrabureaucratic opposition from cadres at all levels who are threatened by the reorganizations, and widespread popular unease about new patterns of social inequality that may accompany greater reliance on market relations. Decentralized management, a wider role for the market, and the vigor of new commercial combines also appear to be hampering the ability of central planners to regulate the economy. Such factors are capable of producing their own political backlash. The new course is, therefore, still a risky gamble in search of a workable balance between plan and market, growth and equality, national priorities and local demands.