IFAD Rural Poverty Report 2010 Regional Consultation Workshop March 25-26, 2010 American University of Lebanon, Beirut, Lebanon

Transcription

1 IFAD Rural Poverty Report 2010 Regional Consultation Workshop March 25-26, 2010 American University of Lebanon, Beirut, Lebanon Synthesis Report Introduction: In the context of the development of the Rural Poverty Report 2010 (RPR2010), the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) is implementing consultations in the different regions of the world. The purpose of these activities is to test out the first draft of the report by gathering input on the experiences and issues specific to each region from representatives of organizations linked to rural development. The Middle East and North Africa (MENA) regional consultation workshop was organized by the Issam Fares Institute for Public Policy and International Affairs and the Faculty of Agricultural and Food Sciences at the American University of Beirut. It was held in Beirut, Lebanon on March 25 and 26, The workshop brought together a total of 26 participants from Egypt, Jordan, Palestine, Tunisia and Lebanon. Participants were provided with a French-language translation of the executive summary of the RPR2010 draft. During the workshop, the main contents of the draft were presented along with the process by which the document is to be finalized, launched and distributed. The discussions were centered around the participants opinions of the strengths and the weaknesses of the report from a regional perspective, with reference to the experiences and issues of rural development in countries in the MENA region. Participants proposed recommendations and aspects to be considered by the editorial team. This report summarizes the main ideas and analyses that were generated from the dayand-a-half discussions on the content of the RPR2010. It draws on the ideas voiced in the plenary discussions as well as the conclusions of 3 working groups feedback regarding different aspects of rural poverty in the MENA region. These ideas will serve to enhance the understanding of rural poverty in the region and give direction for writing the second draft of the Rural Poverty Report 2010 with a better regional perspective. Review of the Draft Rural Poverty Report 2010 The participants began with giving general comments on the report as a whole and then went on discussing the individual chapters. The participants were then divided into 3 groups to discuss, with more focus and detail, the priority issues in the region that were drawn from the earlier dialogue. The 3 topics were: 1. Governance and conflict in fragile states 2. Natural resources management 1

2 3. Role of markets in Rural poverty. Main reported areas to be improved/weaknesses of the RPR 2010: Definitions: Several key terms such as Poverty, Farmer and Rural are not defined clearly in the report. It was suggested that a distinction be made between the various categories that fall under each of these terms. For poverty, for example, the distinction between absolute, extreme and relative poverty should be made clear. The language used in the report was described as being a language of international organizations. Some of the common terms used, such as democracy and other vocabulary were described to have lost their meaning and should be reviewed when writing the second draft of the report. The different scales of the rural poverty problem is not addressed in a way that distinguishes the different scales of the food security problem; regional, national and household level. The participants explain that the sustainable livelihoods framework works best at the micro or household level. There is a lack of analysis of the strong link between the role of the agrifood system (corporatization, terms of trade on locally-produced foods) and rural poverty, especially in the context of agriculture and agricultural production. The participants suggested that the report highlight immediately feasible recommendations (instead of having general, standard recommendation that may not be feasible in all areas). These recommendations should be based on specific examples of countries the region s success stories and draw on specific strategies or policies that have worked best. Also, the regional recommendations should focus on improving existing processes that are in place rather than suggesting new initiatives. Classification of countries by: region, quintiles (welfare differences) and country typology (agriculturally-dependent, transforming and urbanized countries) and linking the categorization to risk and vulnerability, based on 1 or more indicators that measure change over time. Feasible solutions that are feasible within each country typology in order to increase resilience and reduce risks and vulnerabilities. At the same time, the issues that link the different regions together should be highlighted as a common thread. The fiscal priorities of the state are not highlighted in the report as being a main element in rural poverty. Fiscally-strained countries in the MENA region have governments whose expenditure is geared towards bureaucrats, urban elite, monopolies and military. 2

3 Chapter 4: Building the Foundation - Addressing Risk and Reducing Vulnerability Participants suggested that the root causes of the risks should be addressed in the analysis of risks and vulnerabilities and not only discuss ways to deal with them. Another suggestion was to divide risks between structural and natural disaster risks to make it clearer for policymakers. When discussing fostering resilience for seed, water and livestock security, the issues of ownership, distribution and access needs to also be addressed. It was noted by the participants that the report should touch upon the strong informal support systems that many people in MENA countries turn to (at community/tribal/religious levels) in trying to overcome vulnerabilities and volatility risk factors. Social policy issues including social assistance and safety nets for rural poor are lacking in the MENA region. It needs to be emphasized and made clear the importance of addressing rural poverty. Chapter 5: Markets against rural poverty In the analysis on market competitiveness, monopolies were not addressed. In the MENA region, the value chain is geared towards urban monopolies, with high percentage of price margins going to retailers/wholesalers. This is important when speaking about alternative, non-agricultural markets for alleviating rural poverty. When rural poor get stuck in the broad value chain, they are then under the control of the monopolies. Several participants disagreed with the notion that a growing demand for food, commodities and land serves market conditions to reduce rural poverty, as was mentioned in the report. They believe that in several cases, this demand acts as an obstacle in the reduction of rural poverty as it creates monopolies of land and less opportunity for the rural poor. In many cases, such as in Jordan, multinationals import seeds and labor and export the produced commodities, but use the natural resources, land and water, with no integration and benefits to the rural poor. Also, increases in demand for biofuels are not creating opportunities that add value to the rural economy. It is a threat to rural communities, it takes away from selfsufficiency. Important to discuss the negative trends and challenges for rural poor with regards to the changed market context, in addition to the positive ones. The benefits of globalization and exchange in a properly designed market were acknowledged by the participants, but the problem for rural poor is the exclusion that they experience from these markets and the focus should be on lifting of 3

4 barriers and improvement of infrastructure available to the rural poor. One of the barriers being the homogeneous standards and requirements of the products in global markets, which the rural poor have limited capacity to produce. In the discussion about farm wage increases following price increases, it was noted that it is important to discuss which factors (market, governmental) need to be put in place in order for wage increases to occur. In the discussion about the upscaling of smallholder roles being dependant on the private sector, it is important to suggest hpw the private sector be encouraged to make this happen and what other options are available, such as governmental policies and regulations. Chapter 6: What kind of agriculture do rural people need? There was criticism of the title of chapter 6, What kind of agriculture do poor rural people need? as the needs of the all rural poor differ from one region or country to another. A suggestion was to change the title to What kind of agriculture is conducive to rural development and poverty reduction? A major aspect of sustainable agriculture that should be further developed in the report is water resource management, which is important for availability of water and the reduction of water scarcity, a major challenge for reduction of rural poverty in the MENA region. It was reiterated that improvement of the quality of water and investment in irrigation and de-salination of water as well as availability of technology are essential as the rural poor are mainly in the rainfed agricultural areas. Scarcity of water and low access is one of the distinctive common factors in countries in the MENA region linking to rural poverty. Participants commented on the importance of adopting a bottom-up approach in this chapter of the report when discussing the kind of agriculture that rural people need, by taking the rural poor s perception of their own needs into consideration. The interests and perceptions of the farmers is as important as the inputs to attain sustainable agriculture. Chapter 7: Walking on two legs: the role of the non-farm rural economy It would be interesting to include the role the informal sector and civil society plays in the rural area as a providers of non-farm jobs in rural areas. Chapter 8: The action plan achieving substantial rural poverty and hunger reduction by 2030 The practicality of the 4 initiatives listed in Chapter 8 is questionable according to the participants. It was suggested that regional initiatives can be addressed based on each area s distinct characteristics. In the MENA region, the conflicts and fragile 4

5 states and environmental constraints (mainly water in this region) are the distinguishing characteristics. It was also suggested that the last chapter s central theme could be the importance of increasing the power and capabilities of poor rural people, and draw in how each of the previous chapters contribute to this theme. Main reported strengths of the RPR2010: The inclusion of the Green Revolution in the discussion about progress made in the agricultural sector and the use of technology in order to promote a rise out of poverty was much appreciated by the participants. The importance of developing policies to empower the rural poor through use of education and vocational training is highlighted in the report and was considered to be very important by the participants. Summary of Group Discussions: 1. Governance and conflict in fragile states Conflict zones should be aided by policies and plans to enhance local rural people s ability to cope with the conflict-related risks. In the context of undemocratic and decentralized governments and the lack of international pressure for protective policies for rural people in the MENA region, the role of the informal sector, including autonomous grassroots social organizations (local support groups and communities) is important to protect rural poor's livelihoods. In the region, many of the social movements tend to be politically dominated. The report should address ways for these organizations to be more grassroots, representing the whole rural population. Report should focus more on the role of regulatory mechanisms, and not just dependency on market forces, in promoting social protection. In several countries in the MENA region, the reality is that central governments have limited capacity to promote social protection. The impact and credibility of governments of many Arab states is eroding, and in some cases 1 single state has multiple authorities. Therefore, promoting social protection-plus is an unrealistic plan, for the shortterm at least. The report should focus on ways to increases the effectiveness of the state in promoting implementation of measures to improve political economy and interests of the rural poor. The concept of lack of citizenship for many rural people, the case in many MENA countries should be addressed in the report, in which the 5

6 representation in government is not conducive to development plans for the rural poor. In the context of governance, households in the MENA region often do not relate to the state but to other groups, whether religious, tribal, professional, geographic, NGO, private enterprise etc. A mechanism to get the rural households voice and opinion on the pressures constrains and needs for development and poverty alleviation should be better addressed. Some examples of civil society and social organizations for rural development in fragile states in the MENA region that can be learned from. Palestinian grass root organizations such as the Palestinian health relief committee and Palestinian agricultural relief committee provide services to the rural people, and in many cases the government depends on these organizations for the implementation of government programs. Others include microfinance organizations that support for women and farmers collaboration on land protection initiatives. Another important lesson to be learned is that change comes through intersectoral collaboration and that highly-respected members in rural communities play a big role in the implementation of development change. 2. Natural resources management The report should classify farmers by different typology. There is as lack of data on income, the type of agriculture and types of crops planted by farmers. There should be triangulation of data from different sources such as household surveys, and other sources, such as FAO and World Bank datasets. One focus touched upon by this group was legislation and reforms that improve access to, management and quality of natural resources, mainly land and water. It is important to learn from examples of programs that have been implemented in the region and its effect on the reduction of rural poverty. One main area is the improvement of water access and management. Improvement of irrigation systems, with the use of modern irrigation techniques was done in Tunisia and Jordan, as farmers with irrigated land are better off than those with non-irrigated land. There is a need for evidence that these programs are benefitting the rural poor in particular. The link between the limited access to resources, conflict and rural poverty needs to be highlighted more in the report. The MENA region, in particular, faces the issue of large inequality in land sharing. In Lebanon, for example, 50% of agricultural land is owned by 0.01%, and the remaining land is shared by the rest. Land is a prerequisite for agriculture and livelihoods of the rural people. This lack of and struggle to have access to land contributes to strife and conflict. There is a need for evidence on the effect that subsidies have on rural poor. Subsidies policies have been shown to be designed for the benefit of the rich farmers, those with more assets, more than the rural poor farmers. 6

7 3. Role of markets in Rural poverty An important discussion is on whether rural poor should focus on niche strategy products with high-value added or massive crops to ensure sustainable revenues. Another question is whether farmers should be producing cash crops that generate revenues or whether they should produce crops with high nutritional value that they will consume to develop food sovereignty. There was agreement among the participants that the report should stress diversification of both markets and products in order to maximize the opportunities available to rural farmers. There is a need to address the absence of a labor code and migrant workers and farmers rights and insurance packages in MENA countries such as Lebanon, Jordan and the Gulf countries,. Another issue is that of property rights for poor rural farmers. It is critical for these market fundamentals to be put in place in the region. The lack of these fundamentals and the political forces that control the economy reduce the opportunities for poor rural people to rise out of poverty. The need to focus on social interventions for rural poor was discussed. Based on household surveys in Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Egypt, Palestine, most family spending is on food, heat & transportation, and health. Therefore, priorities for social interventions and investments should be placed on subsidizing heat & transportation and health-care in order to relieve the rural poor of these cost burdens. When comparing the MENA region to East Asia, we can see that the State in East Asia was more pro-active in improving access to markets for the rural people, through development of transportation infrastructure. The MENA countries which are lacking regional integration should follow East Asia s example to promote access and therefore food security. 7