In
my last weblog post, we discussed the rationale behind the quest of developing
countries, Nigeria inclusive, to attain sustainable economic development
through economic development planning driven through industrial and agriculture
policies and programmes.
Specifically,
industrial economic development policies in Nigeria were discussed in the last
post. We shall be dwelling more on agriculture development policies put in place
in the various economic development plans in the country.
We
shall consequently be concluding by advancing reasons why these plans had not
achieved their objective of economic diversification and sustainable
development in Nigeria.
Nigeria’s
perception of the place and role of agriculture in national development changed
considerably over time. Different strategies adopted by the country shows
dynamism and changing strategies that overlaps and cannot be appropriately isolated
into specific time period.
Often
it was a combination of two or more strategies to implement agricultural development
policies designed at different Nigeria national development plans.
In
order to revamp the agriculture sector, the federal government had embarked on
and implemented several agriculture development policies and programmes; some
of which are defunct or abandoned, and some restructured while others are still
in place.
These
agriculture policies and programmes include the farm settlement scheme,
National Accelerated Food Production (NAFPP), Agricultural Development Projects
(ADPs), River Basin Development Authorities (RBDAs), National Seed Service
(NSS), National Centre for Agricultural Mechanisation (NCAM), Agricultural and
Rural Management Training Institute (ARMTI) and Agricultural Credit Guarantee
Scheme Fund (ACGSF).
Others
were the Nigerian Agricultural Cooperative And Rural Development Bank
(NACRDB)/agricultural bank, Operation Feed the Nation (OFN), Green Revolution
Programme, Directorate Of Foods, Roads And Rural Infrastructure (DFFRI),
Nigerian agricultural insurance company (NAIC), National Agricultural Land
Development Authority (NALDA), Specialised Universities for Agriculture, Root
and Tuber Expansion Programme (RTEP) and rural banking scheme, etc (Salami,
2007).
Furthermore,
the Federal Government in 2004 launched another economic reform called National
Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy (NEEDS) programme. In the
agricultural sector, NEEDS were directed to influence improvement in the production,
processing and distribution of agricultural commodities. Despite all the
aforementioned reform policies and programmes, the performance of the sector
had not fared better than it was shortly after Nigeria independence.
According
to Olayemi (1998) agricultural development strategies that have been adopted in
the Nigeria can be categorised into the exploitative strategies, the
agricultural project strategy, the direct government production strategy and
the integrated rural development strategy.
We shall also be including the new millennium agricultural policies/programmes.
Exploitative Strategy
The
Nigerian Government during the colonial period and early years of independence
adopted this strategy for agricultural development. In the 1950s the
traditional economists observed agricultural sector as a residual, subsistence
sector made up of peasant farmers.
Myint
(1958) in his “Vent-for-surplus” theory particularly categorized a developing
economy as consisting of a “modern sector” that is largely non-agricultural and
a “subsistence sector” that is agricultural. The subsistence sector is
perceived according to this theory to be unproductive but full of underutilized
resources is expected to feed the modern sectors.
One
of the implications of the above theory is that, the subsistence sector was
expected to be taxed to finance the modern sector. This essentially was the
basis of the agricultural strategy in the 1950s and the 1960s in Nigeria where export
crops were levied to provide revenue for government to develop the modern
sector (Adubi 2004).
The
Government established institutions such as the agricultural marketing board
system to boost revenue generation efforts through taxing of peasant farmers
that produce export crops such as cocoa, groundnut, palm produce, cotton, etc
during this period.
Agricultural Project Strategy
The
agricultural project strategy coincided with the time of internal
self-government up till 1968 when government intervention in agriculture was
minimal. The small-scale farmers in Nigeria bore the brunt of agricultural
development efforts in Nigeria during this period (Egwu and Akubuilo, 2007).
Agriculture
was seen as a sector that has appropriate linkage with other sectors and should
be developed in complement with other sectors in other to effect the needed
forward and backward linkages.
Agriculture
policies were regionalized during this phase with the establishment of
extension fields and research institutes. Regional public funds were invested
in agriculture and there were new schemes such as farm settlement schemes
established to create modern literate farmers and promote agricultural
development. Tree crop plantations, smaller farmer credit schemes, and
Agricultural Development corporation project was established to encourage
development of tree crops.
Direct Government Production Strategy
This
phase was merely a deepening of the process of direct government intervention
and investment in agriculture. This period started in 1970 and coincided with
the oil boom in Nigeria.
The
over dependence and subsequent neglect of the agricultural sector in Nigeria as
the result of oil boom have not augured well for the country and thus,
necessitated Nigeria government as from 1975 to directly get involved in
several large scale agricultural projects and specialization in production of
grains, livestock, dairies, animal feed etc.
Other
strategies include the establishment of Nigeria Agricultural Co-operative Bank
(NACB) in 1975 when there was massive Federal Government intervention and
investment in agriculture spurred majorly by the need country’s need to
rehabilitate and resuscitate agriculture sector and food crisis witnessed after
the civil war.
The
agriculture policy during this period demanded immediate huge investments by
government given that there was low capacity in the private sector. Second, the
ideological imperatives in the world then favoured direct involvement of
government in directing investments in agricultural business and allied
activities (Adubi, 2004).
The
period witnessed direct involvement of governments in directing investments in
agricultural production activities and the establishment of schemes and
research institutes such as National Accelerated Food Production Project
(NAFPP), Nigerian Agricultural Co-operative Bank (NACB), etc.
Integrated Rural Development Strategy
The
government realized in the mid-1970s that the strategy of direct agricultural
production was not yielding the desired results. So, there was gradual shift to
an agricultural development approach which involved the adoption of an
integrated rural development strategy.
Under
this strategy, rural development was seen from a holistic perspective with
agricultural development problems being only part of a larger rural development
concern.
This prompted the government to embark on multipurpose rural
development programmes and programmes implementing institutions such as the
Agricultural Development Projects (ADPs), the River Basin Development
Authorities (RBDAS), the Directorate of Food, Roads and Rural Infrastructure
(DFRRI), the National Agricultural Land Development Agency, (NALDA), the
Operation Feed the Nation (OFN), the Green Revolution (GR), etc.
It
should be noted that this integrated rural development strategy was also
adopted during the Structural Adjustment Programme (SAP) era but with
significant changes in institutional design, intensity of activities and modes
of operation.
The New Millennium Agricultural Policies
At
the inception of the new democratic administration in May 1999 and shortly
before then, several institutional changes were made in order to realize the
agriculture policies objectives in line with the belief that agricultural and
rural development are sin quo non for improved economic development in Nigeria
and to enable the Nigerian agricultural sector respond to the imperatives of
the emerging global economic order.
The
institutional changes made for successful agriculture policies implementation in
Nigeria during this period include the relocation of the department of
co-operatives of the Ministry of Labour and its merger with the agricultural
co-operatives division of the Ministry of Agriculture, the transfer of the
Department of Rural Development from the Ministry of Water Resources to the
Ministry of Agriculture (all before 1999).
The
scrapping of the erstwhile National Agricultural Land Development Authority
(NALDA) and the merging of its functions with the rural development department,
the scrapping of the Federal Agricultural Co-Ordinating Unit (FACU) and the
Agricultural Projects Monitoring and Evaluation Unit (APMEU) and the setting up
of Projects Co-Ordinating Unit (PCU) and later transformed into the National
Food Reserve Agency (NFRA).
Others
include the streamlining of institutions for agricultural credit delivery with
the emergence of the Nigerian Agricultural Co-Operative and Rural Development
Bank (NACRDB) from the merger of the erstwhile Nigerian Agricultural and
Co-Operative Bank (NACB) and the Peoples Bank and the Family Economic
Advancement Programme (FEAP).
The
new agricultural policy has a clear statement of objectives; the policy seeks
to attain self-sustaining growth in all the agriculture sub-sectors and the
structural transformation necessary for the overall socio-economic development
of the country as well as the improvement in the quality of life of Nigerians.
The
above policy objective reflects the current policy recognition of agriculture
as a vital sector under the poverty alleviation programme in Nigeria.
The
government also sought to pursue the following specific objectives in the
current agriculture policy document:
i.
Attainment of self-sufficiency in basic food commodities with particular
reference to those which consume considerable shares of Nigeria’s foreign
exchange and for which the country has comparative advantage in local
production.
ii.
Increase in local production of agricultural raw materials to meet the growth
of an expanding industrial sector.
iii.
Increase in production and processing of exportable commodities with a view to
increasing their foreign exchange earning capacity and further diversifying the
country’s export base and sources of foreign exchange earnings;
iv.
Modernization of agricultural production, processing, storage and distribution
through the infusion of improved technologies and management so that
agriculture can be more responsive to the demand of other sectors of the
Nigerian economy.
v.
Creation of more agricultural and rural employment opportunities to increase
income of farmers and rural dwellers and productively absorb an increasing
labour force in the nation.
Other
initiatives that were put in place and/or to step-up agricultural development and ensure
food security are the root and tuber expansion programme, national cocoa
development committee, Special Programme on Food Security (SPFS) and National
Fadama Project. Others also include the Fish farm estate development,
initiatives for increased agricultural production, south-south cooperation
initiative and Nigeria-France project on agricultural development.
This
phase of agriculture development policy implementation in Nigeria witnessed a
drastic reduction in food imports from 14.5% to 5% of total imports.
Presidential
initiatives on specific agricultural commodities (for example cassava, rice) in
order to generate N3 billion annually from exports also featured during this
period. Public Private Partnership (PPP) in the development of agricultural
marketing as well as the promotion of integrated rural development also marked
this phase.
Reasons for the Failure of Agricultural Development Policies
in Nigeria
a.
Absence
of Involvement of all stakeholders:
There should be proper interaction between all stakeholders both at the time of
planning and implementing national agricultural programmes in the country.
Agriculturists,
researchers and more importantly the farmers/rural dwellers that are normally
ignored during planning and implementation of agricultural/rural development
policies and programmes should all be taken on board since they are in a better
position to identify the policies and programmes that will be tailored to the
need of the farmers/masses.
The
lack of full and non-participation of these groups of stakeholders has led to
failure of intervention programmes, increased poverty and inaccessibility of
basic social amenities with dwindling economic fortune and failure of
agriculture policies.
b.
Weak
agriculture development policies: Agricultural
policies should be specific and spelt out for the masses and the world to know.
Also
a policy should have strategy, targets, goals, specific objectives and most
importantly programmes or projects geared toward their accomplishment.
c. Short duration of
agriculture development policies: There should be continuity of and
perpetual implementation of agriculture development policies by incumbent and
new administration for the impact of the policies to be felt on Nigeria economy.
d. Inconsistency
of regional agriculture development policies with the national policies:
New agriculture policies and programmes should be consistent, work in harmony
and closely with state and national policies and programmes.
The good
relationship and peaceful atmosphere will always ensure success of agricultural
policies and programme and consequent agricultural development.
e. Inadequate
monitoring and evaluation of programmes:
Evaluation is purposely done to determine achievements of rural/agriculture
development programmes vis-a-vis the set policy objectives.
Evaluation
techniques can serve to improve implementation and efficiency of agriculture
development programmes after interventions have begun, provide evidence as to
the cost efficiency and impact of a specific intervention within and between
policy sectors (FAO, 2004).
Conclusion
The
past national agriculture development policies/programmes have failed to
improve standard of living of millions of Nigeria and economic development of
the country.
To
realize the objective of sustainable economic development in Nigeria, the
reasons enumerated here as responsible for the failure of agriculture
development policies/programmes in Nigeria need to be address, else every “good
policy” prescription designed for implementation will result to failure.
References
Adubi
AA (2004). “Agriculture: Its performance, problems and prospects”. Democratic Government
Development. In Bello Imam I. B.
and M. I. Obadan (Ed). Management in Nigeria’s
Fourth Republic 1999–2003 CLGARDS, 2004.
Egwu
WE, and Akubuilo CJC (2007). “Agricultural Policy, Development and
Implementation in Agricultural Economics
and Extension.
Food
and Agricultural Organisation (FAO), (2004). TheEthics of Sustainable
Agricultural Intensification. FAO Rome,
Italy (www/fao,org: Editional Production and Design Group Publishing Management).
Olayemi
JK (1998). “Agricultural Development Strategy: Institutional Framework and
Support, “Paper presented at the
workshop on Policy Issues and Planning in the Agricultural Sector, NCEMA, June 15-26, 1998.
Comments
Post a Comment
Be free to make your comment!