The Case for a new approach to sustained food security-The EBOLA effect; Focus on Sierra Leone

For decades now, African and other developing countries have put forward numerous policies and projects with the aim of improving the food security for their nations. These policies have been given numerous colorful titles; Poverty Alleviation, Structural Adjustment programme for the agricultural sector to name a few in Sierra Leone. However, the green revolution that was successful in Asian nations and parts of South America has not taken root in Africa.

The current EBOLA crisis has moved this alarming food insecurity issue from a somewhat abstract context into a more physical visible context. The EBOLA crisis is very different from war or famine disasters, but the effect can be concluded to have been far greater compared to the two other forms of disasters in just the past 8 months that it has been raging in the West African sub-region. In past famine and war situations, other sectors of the economy of some countries have been known to thrive in spite of the difficult circumstances because there is some predictability of the risk involved. In the current Ebola outbreak, the predictable risk is the human death rate (over 70% for infected persons) and the unpredictability risk is that anyone can become infected through contact, thereby putting any financial sector’s workforce at risk. As a result, the most known effective Ebola preventive measure (avoiding body contact) has put every financial sector’s workforce at a standstill.

Recent pronouncements by WFP, WHO and CARE have all revealed that an integrated approach to “propping” up the food security of these Ebola-Affected nations is a very important step to avoid starvation and avert political strife that have toppled governments in recent times (Tunisia and Algeria; revolutions that were initiated/facilitated by the rise in the cost of staple crops; wheat in particular). The three most infected Ebola countries were forecasted to achieve an average of over 7% growth in their individual GDPs. Unfortunately; the basis for such predictions was predicated on the 2013 outputs of extractive minerals (bauxite in the case of Guinea, iron Ore in Sierra Leone and rubber in Liberia). The Ebola outbreak in these countries came at the most vulnerable time during which the markets for minerals in the last few months have seen an almost 50% drop in the prices of these metals. These projections were inclusive of the agricultural sector; off which the main drivers were export crops (Sugar cane & Palm oil- for energy in Sierra Leone; Rice, Millet, pineapple in Guinea; and Rubber in the case of Liberia). The staple food crops of rice, cassava, corn, and other legumes were being cultivated but not much emphasis was given to an integrated approach for a sustained agricultural system and better food security.

The UNDP report “The Economic and Social Impact of Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) in Sierra Leone; released 14 November, 2014, raises red flags in the wake of the epidemic that has so far claimed over 5,000 lives, mostly in Liberia, Sierra Leone and Guinea since it began in early 2014. This report, a synthesis of surveys and analyses by the World Bank, the African Development Bank, and the International Monetary Fund, found that disruptions in most sectors will shrink the GDP from a successful 20.1% in 2013, which was close to the fastest economic growth in the world, to a projected 5% for 2014. Furthermore, shortages in food, foreign currency, and depreciation of the national currency (Leone) will put pressure on the national budget and Sierra Leone’s post-Ebola recovery.” http://www.sl.undp.org/content/sierraleone/en/home/presscenter/pressreleases/2014/11/14/red-flags-raised-as-ebola-set-to-reverse-development-gains-un-study-finds/

With the non-existence of food reserves and an effective total value chain for the country’s main staple crops, WFP and other organizations have resorted (during this crisis) to age old practice of providing imported rice, cooking-oil, and beans (all of which can be effectively grown in these countries) to starving citizens of these countries. In this crisis, it is evident that there is minimal tracking system of the impact of this aid on the lives of the end-users of these products. Perhaps a more important and hidden aspect of this handouts is the adverse effect of dependence by the populace on these hand outs in the long term thereby eroding the impetus for current farmers to cultivate their farms and the increased apprehension of potential farmers to enter into the farming sector to produce crops as a way of life. In other cases, food aid have been used as political weapons for certain parties to reward their political bases or punish opposition areas as is evident in the Sudan conflict where rebel warring factions deprive food convoys from reaching opponent backed areas of the country

Even though no one is against food aid, there is a strong argument for international bodies and African governments to push for robust local disaster development plans to include farming (especially for staple crops) as the major component in agricultural disaster response plan for African countries (where over 65% of the populace engaged in agriculture). SOBBA is currently working in collaboration with the Njala University College (SL), and other Sierra Leonean agricultural bodies and professionals to ignite a robust discussion around new agricultural and food security approaches which will be published in two weeks in our December newsletter.

#farming #women #undp #who #impact #aid #evd