Agricultural policy in Africa after adjustment

This study looks at agricultural policy in Africa since structural adjustment, with the aim of drawing conclusions about policies for the post-adjustment era.The study suggests that while some of the changes brought about under agricultural structural adjustment go too far, in many other respects they do not go far enough. One of the criticisms the authors and and others have made of structural adjustment is that it has been defined and implemented in a wide range of very different situations and countries with entirely inadequate concern for these differences and following basically the same set of policies throughout Africa. The author suggests that to set out ‘Africa-wide’ conclusions would be to compound this error, so the report goes on to draw conclusions and suggest recommendations as a basis for discussion and refinement in relation to local conditions, and not for immediate implementation.The following five propostions are used as the basis for the report's dicussson:structural adjustment has paid insufficient attention to the effects of globalisation, liberalisation, privatisation (and structural adjustment itself) on the conditions within which adjustment has to be implementedwhile privatisation and liberalisation of state institutions under structural adjustment to some extent have increased cost effectiveness, the liberalisation process has gone too far and the private sector has failed to take over many of productive services and functions from abandoned state organisationsthe effects of structural adjustment have been socially and geographically skewed, favouring better-off farmers and farmers living in areas with good market access. The study has shown that in areas that are more remote from main consumer markets and/or less served by transport infrastructure, the elimination of pan-territorial pricing for inputs and crops, combined with the removal of input subsidies, has had a negative impact on food producers. Diversification into other crops is only slowly taking place in these areas, as technological opportunities are limitedthe public institutions which have survived structural adjustment have inadequately adjusted their mode of operation and functions to post-adjustment realities. The role of many state institutions has changed; from being monopoly implementers, they have become one among several actors as well as being responsible for regulating, supporting and providing an enabling environment for private entrepreneursfarmers potentially could play a greatly enhanced role in service provision after structural adjustment. The policy changes since adjustment have only to a limited extent taken advantage of this and most African governments have contributed little to stimulate and support farmers to organise locally and take on new functions and responsibilities