Privatisation,empowerment and accountability: What are the policy implications for establishing effective farmer organisations?

Weak institutional development and information flows have constrained the extent to which the smallholder farming sector in developing countries can significantly drive growth and poverty reduction. This is despite widely implemented economic liberalisation policies focussing on market efficiency. Farmer organisations are viewed as a potential means of addressing public and private institutional failure but this has frequently been limited by inequalities in access to power and information. This article investigates two issues that have received little research attention to date: what role downward accountability plays in enabling farmer organisations to improve services and markets, and what influences the extent to which downward accountability is achieved. Kenya Tea Development Agency (KTDA), one of the largest farmer organisations in the world (>400,000 farmers) is examined alongside wider literature. Mixed methods were used including key informant interviews, and eight months of participant observation followed by a questionnaire survey. The article concludes that without effective downward accountability farmer organisations can become characterised by institutions and mechanisms that favour elites, restricted weak coordination and regulation, and manipulated information flows. This in turn reduces individuals’ incentives to invest. If farmer organisations are to realise their potential as a means of enabling the smallholder sector to significantly contribute to economic growth and poverty reduction, policy and research needs to address key factors which influence accountability including: how to ensure initial processes in formation of farmer organisations establish appropriate structures and rules; strong state regulation to enhance corporate accountability; transparent information provision regarding actions of farmer organisation leaders; and the role independent non-government organisations can play. Consequently attention needs to focus on developing means of legitimising rights, building poor people's capacity to challenge exclusion, and moving from rights to obligations regarding information provision.     

Can women's self‐help groups improve access to information,decision‐making,and agricultural practices? The Indian case

Effective agricultural extension is key to improving productivity, increasing farmers’ access to information, and promoting more diverse sets of crops and improved methods of cultivation. In India, however, the coverage of agricultural extension workers and the relevance of extension advice is poor. We investigate whether a women's self‐help group (SHG) platform could be an effective way of improving access to information, women's empowerment in agriculture, agricultural practices, and production diversity. We use cross‐sectional data on close to 1,000 women from five states in India and employ nearest‐neighbor matching models to match SHG and non‐SHG women along a range of observed characteristics. We find that participation in an SHG increases women's access to information and their participation in some agricultural decisions, but has limited impact on agricultural practices or outcomes, possibly due to financial constraints, social norms, and women's domestic responsibilities. SHGs need to go beyond provision of information to changing the dynamics around women's participation in agriculture to effectively translate knowledge into practice.     

Payments for environmental services to promote “climate‐smart agriculture”? Potential and challenges

Payments for environmental services (PES) have gained wide popularity as approaches to promote environmentally friendly land use or agricultural production practices. Yet academics have also voiced concerns against seeing PES as a panacea. This article discusses whether PES is an appropriate and promising approach to promote so‐called “climate‐smart agriculture” (CSA) practices, which we define as agricultural production practices that contribute to CO₂ emission reductions and/or removals and provide benefits to farmers via increased productivity and profits and reduced vulnerability to climate change. PES appears most promising for the promotion of CSA practices in small‐scale farming contexts with low incomes. Effective design, however, requires solid estimates of cost and benefit flows from CSA adoption over time, accounting for differences in socioeconomic and ecological conditions, and addressing the risk of leakage. Funding for such PES will likely have to come from public sources, and seems most promising where synergies with other objectives such as agricultural development, food security, and climate adaptation or other environmental services exist. The potential of alternative approaches for CSA support such as taxation with rebates for CSA practices, CSA‐related investment support such as microcredits, and hybrid approaches such as conditional microcredit should be further investigated.     

How sensitive is U.S. agricultural trade to the bilateral exchange rate? Evidence from bulk,intermediate, and consumer‐oriented products

This article examines the dynamic effects of changes in bilateral exchange rates on changes in bilateral trade of bulk, intermediate, and consumer‐oriented agricultural products between the United States and its 10 major trading partners. We find that, for consumer‐oriented products, U.S. exports are highly sensitive to bilateral exchange rates in both the short and long run, while U.S. imports are mostly responsive only in the short run. For bulk products, on the other hand, U.S. exports and imports are relatively insensitive to exchange rate changes in both the short and long run. For intermediate products, exports and imports are responsive to exchange rate changes in the short run, but not in the long run. It is also found that income of the United States and its trading partners has a significant effect on U.S. exports and imports of the three types of agricultural products in both the short and long run.     

Short and long‐run returns to agricultural R&D in South Africa,or will the real rate of return please stand up?

This paper briefly presents the results of a total factor productivity (TFP) study of South African commercial agriculture, for 1947‐1997, and illustrates some potential pitfalls in rate of return to research (ROR) calculations. The lag between R&D and TFP is analyzed and found to be only 9 years, with a pronounced negative skew, reflecting the adaptive focus of the South African system. The two‐stage approach gives a massive ROR of 170%. The predetermined lag parameters are then used in modeling the knowledge stock, to refine the estimates of the ROR from short‐ and long‐run dual profit functions. In the short run, with the capital inputs treated as fixed, the ROR is a more reasonable 44%. In the long run, with adjustment of the capital stocks, it rises to 113%, which would reflect the fact that new technology is embodied in the capital items. However, the long‐run model raises a new problem since capital stock adjustment takes 11 years, 2 years longer than the lag between R&D and TFP. If this is assumed to be the correct lag, the ROR falls to 58%, a best estimate. The paper draws attention to the possible sensitivity of rate of return calculations to assumed lag structure, particularly when the lag between changes in R&D and TFP is skewed.