Globalization and the smallholders

A major question that has surfaced in the changing context of world agriculture is whether the smallholders would ride the wave of globalization or be swept away. This paper addresses the debate with a four-fold objective: (1) it maps different factors that are likely to impinge on developing country smallholders as a result of globalization in general and of agriculture in particular (2) it briefly reviews literature and summarizes different approaches and methodology used to study this question (3) it identifies areas which have been the focus of attention so far and those that are relatively under-researched (4) it attempts to draw some conclusions regarding the impact of globalization on the smallholders from the literature review, and then suggests some policy implications if globalization is to benefit the smallholders. The paper finds, among others, that studies that focus on trade liberalization alone (operating through price changes) and those that address broader issues of globalization (such as changing structure of food industry and new relationships in the interface of farm and firm, SPS issues, etc.) have run somewhat parallel to each other where a greater integration of the two would be more valuable. Methodological approaches may have something to do with this apparent dichotomy. An important part of this study is to find out from the existing literature whether smallholders have benefited or adversely affected by from the globalization process. There appears to be no clear evidence that smallholders in one region may have done better than those in another. However, even while acknowledging the significant differences within regions themselves, it is evident that whether smallholders have benefited or have been hurt is determined by a fairly narrow range of issues – vertical coordination with processors or exporters, access to infrastructure and finance (credit), role of public sector and international involvement in capacity building, alternatives available in non-farm sector, etc. Based on this, the paper concludes that policy interventions vis-à-vis smallholders should essentially have a twin focus (1) removing the shackles that currently constrain smallholders from exploiting opportunities that globalization presents and (2) ensuring minimum adverse impact, both being two sides of the same coin. While the former can be accomplished through enabling policies, the latter would have to be tackled through coping policies. Particular areas identified as critical enabling factors are greater vertical coordination, removing credit constraints, reducing transactions costs, building social capital, greater role for public sector in providing infrastructure and facilitating institutions and also greater initiatives for international capacity building. On the other hand, coping strategies would include provision of credible safety nets and risk coping instruments, promoting exit options particularly through promotion of opportunities in the rural non-farm sector, guarding against harmful monopolistic competition, and focused research on technologies for small farmers. Needless to say, the relative importance of these factors would vary across regions. It is thus important to identify which battery of policies is appropriate depending on the unique circumstances of each region. It is equally important to draw lessons from the several success stories to be able to replicate these successes on a larger scale in a meaningful way. Only then can small farmers make big gains from globalization.Globalization ,

Rice trade liberalization and poverty

Rice is the lifeline of almost 70% of the world's poor residing in Asia, where more than 90% of world rice production and consumption takes place. Rice trade liberalization therefore has tremendous implications for poverty. The world rice market is highly distorted, partly because of the high degree of intervention in rice markets across the world. While poor countries such as Thailand, Vietnam, and India tend to “disprotect” rice sectors, the rich countries of East Asia (Japan and Korea), Europe, and the United States heavily support their rice producers. As a result, there is great diversity in domestic rice price levels, with very high prices in the latter countries and very low prices in the former. Trade liberalization would thus result in flows from these poorer Asian countries to East Asia and Europe. This is predicted to have beneficial effects for poverty, through producer price increases and second-round effects (wages, employment, and investment) in exporting countries, and to augment short-term food security in poor importing countries. However, if rice trade liberalization is to contribute to poverty alleviation in developing countries, there is a need to streamline distortionary agricultural policies, particularly in developed countries. Also important are “behind the border” reforms in developing countries aimed at reducing transactions costs for farmers, rationalizing input pricing policies, ensuring access to risk management institutions and safety nets, improving access to food, and combating adverse environmental conditions. In the long run, rice trade liberalization might have to be coupled with initiatives to enhance agricultural productivity and rural economic growth to be able to make a dent in poverty.

Smallholder Participation in Agricultural Value Chains: Comparative Evidence from Three Continents

Supermarkets, specialized wholesalers, and processors and agro-exporters’ agricultural value chains have begun to transform the marketing channels into which smallholder farmers sell produce in low-income economies. We develop a conceptual framework through which to study contracting between smallholders and a commodity-processing firm. We then conduct an empirical meta-analysis of agricultural value chains in five countries across three continents (Ghana, India, Madagascar, Mozambique, and Nicaragua). We document patterns of participation, the welfare gains associated with participation, reasons for non-participation, the significant extent of contract non-compliance, and the considerable dynamism of these value chains, as farmers and firms enter and exit frequently.

Smallholder Participation in Agricultural Value Chains: Comparative Evidence from Three Continents

Supermarkets, specialized wholesalers, and processors and agro-exporters’ agricultural value chains have begun to transform the marketing channels into which smallholder farmers sell produce in low-income economies. We develop a conceptual framework through which to study contracting between smallholders and a commodity-processing firm. We then conduct an empirical meta-analysis of agricultural value chains in five countries across three continents (Ghana, India, Madagascar, Mozambique, and Nicaragua). We document patterns of participation, the welfare gains associated with participation, reasons for non-participation, the significant extent of contract non-compliance, and the considerable dynamism of these value chains, as farmers and firms enter and exit frequently.Agricultural Value Chains, Contract Farming, Africa, Asia, Latin America

�ର ଉପ�ାପନ ପାଇଁ େଯାଜନା �ର ଏବଂ �ତିନିଧ�� ପାଇଁ େଗାଟିଏ ଦ�ତା �ଶି�ଣ ପୁ�ିକା

This publication was translated into the Odia (Oriya) language: https://doi.org/10.2499/p15738coll2.136981The International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), one of the research centers within the global Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR), has a long history of gender research relevant to its mission of reducing poverty and ending hunger and malnutrition. Over the last two decades, gender has been effectively incorporated into all of IFPRI’s strategic research areas and into all phases of research. There is abundant evidence of IFPRI’s role as a leading global think tank on gender issues. The broader CGIAR shares IFPRI’s strong commitment to high-quality gender research. This commitment is embodied in the CGIAR Gender Impact Platform, the CGIAR Research Initiative on Gender Equality, and a network of gender research coordinators embedded in all CGIAR centers. Collectively, these efforts and their affiliated gender researchers work continuously with partners to fill gender and inclusion evidence gaps; build capacity and set directions to enable CGIAR to have maximum impact on gender equality; and promote opportunities for youth and social inclusion in agriculture and food systems

Reasons for Non-compliance among Patients Treated Under Revised National Tuberculosis Control Programme (RNTCP), Tiruvallur District, South India

Objectives: To elicit reasons for treatment default from a cohort of TB patients under RNTCP and their DOT providers. Methods: A total of 186 defaulters among the 938 patients registered during 3rd and 4th quarters of 1999 and 2001 in one Tubercuflosis Unit (TU) of Tiruvallur district, Tamil Nadu and their DOT providers were included in the study. They were interviewed using a semi-structured interview schedule. Results: Sixteen (9%) had completed treatment, 25(13%) died after defaulting, and 4(2%) could not be traced. Main reasons given by the remaining 141 patients and their DOT providers were: drug related problems (42%, 34%), migration (29%, 31%), relief from symptoms (20%, 16%), work related (15%, 10%), alcohol consumption (15%, 21%), treatment from other centers (13%, 4%), respectively. Risk factors for default were alcoholism (P<0.001), category of treatment (P<0.001), smear status (P<0.001), type of disease (P<0.001) and inconvenience for DOT (P<0.01). Conclusion: This study has identified group of patients vulnerable to default such as males, alcoholics, smear positive cases, and DOT being inconvenient. Intensifying motivation and counselling of this group of cases are likely to improve patient compliance and reduce default

Women's voice and agency in choosing assets: A new study on MGNREGA in India

This paper was written with a research partner, Professional Assistance for Development Action (PRADAN).In 2005, India passed the National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (NREGA, “the Act”), a law guaranteeing all rural households 100 days of work at a minimum wage through the building of durable assets, which created one of the largest anti-poverty programs in the world. Now known as the Mahatma Gandhi NREGA (MGNREGA), a notable feature of the program is that it envisions a democratic, bottom-up process of choosing which durable assets would be built within a community. Toward this end, the Act gives citizens the right to participate in the process of identifying potential projects and delegates responsibility to village governments in selecting which assets to build. Yet, in the long history of public works programs, there has been limited research on how assets created under such workfare programs are selected, or how to increase the role of women or other marginalized groups in the decision-making process. The Act provides a list of permissible works that span natural resource management, individual and community assets, common infrastructure for women’s groups, and rural infrastructure more broadly. Given the scale of the program, the assets selected at the village level have tremendous potential to enhance rural resilience to unexpected shocks and crises, especially those related to climate change. This is important, as extreme weather events on the Indian subcontinent are increasing, both in frequency and in the magnitude of their impacts on agricultural productivity, household livelihoods, assets and incomes, and health and nutrition. These events, as well as their impacts on incomes, often affect women more severely (Mason and Agan 2015; Kosec et al. forthcoming). Understanding how to enhance women’s voice and agency within the process of selecting community assets is important for three major reasons. First, women and men may have different asset preferences (Chattopadhyay and Duflo 2004). Recent time-use survey data from India find that women spend far more time on unpaid domestic and care work than men (eight times as much) (India, NSO 2019). Thus, women may place relatively more value on projects that reduce effort in collecting fuel and water, for example. If their voices are not included in the asset selection process, the village could miss out on a range of development projects that would improve overall productivity, resilience, and well-being. Second, where projects are built affects who benefits from them. Households that had MGNREGA assets built on their own land or that live near an asset cultivate more land, use more inputs (including their own labor), and have higher agricultural output (Gehrke 2015; Muralidharan et al. 2021). Ensuring that women influence asset placement is thus critical. Third, greater participation and inclusivity in the process of selecting community development projects can increase the perceived legitimacy and satisfaction with projects, as well as willingness to contribute toward their construction and maintenance (Olken 2010). Within MGNREGA, households that report playing a greater role in project selection also report greater satisfaction with the usefulness, quality, and maintenance of the projects (Ranaware et al. 2015)