Farming

Agricultural policies in Africa harming the poorest

Published

10 years ago

March 1, 2016

Growing for export: May ‘exacerbate poverty’

AGRICULTURAL policies aimed at alleviating poverty in Africa could be making things worse, according to new research findings.

University of East Anglia (UEA) researchers this week published a report on so-called ‘green revolution’ policies in Rwanda. Governments, international donors and organisations such as the International Monetary Fund claim these strategies are successfully growing the economy and alleviating poverty, but researchers revealed that they may in fact be having very negative impacts on the poorest people in the country.

One of the major strategies to reduce poverty in sub-Saharan Africa is through policies aiming to increase and ‘modernise’ agricultural production. Up to 90 per cent of people in some African countries are smallholder farmers reliant on agriculture, for whom agricultural innovation, such as using new seed varieties and cultivation techniques, holds potential benefit but also great risk.

In the 1960s and 70s policies supporting new seeds for marketable crops, sold at guaranteed prices, helped many farmers and transformed economies in Asian countries. These became known as “green revolutions”. The new wave of green revolution policies in sub- Saharan Africa is supported by multinational companies and western donors, and is impacting the lives of tens, even hundreds of millions of smallholder farmers, according to Dr Neil Dawson, who led the UEA study.

The UEA research reveals that only a relatively wealthy minority have been able to keep to enforced modernisation because the poorest farmers cannot afford the risk of taking out credit for the approved inputs, such as seeds and fertilisers. Their fears of harvesting nothing from new crops and the potential for the government to seize and reallocate their land means many choose to sell up instead.

PRIVATE AID MAY NOT BE HELPING

The report follows another by social justice organisation Global Justice Now, which suggested the world’s largest private donors, who wield huge amounts of influence and financial power have “Dangerously and unaccountably [distorted] the direction of international development” in a way that could entrench corporate power and poverty. This has been done by, amongst other things, championing highly industrialised agriculture, which is undermining smaller-scale, biologically diverse systems.

Dr Dawson’s findings tie in with recent debates about strategies to feed the world in the face of growing populations, for example the influence of wealthy donors such as the Gates Foundation, initiative’s such as the New Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition, and multinational companies such as Monsanto in pushing for their vision of agriculture in Africa.

There have also been debates about small versus large farms being best to combat hunger in Africa, while struggles to maintain local control over land and food production, for example among the Oromo people in Ethiopia, have been highlighted. In a recent policy document advocating on behalf of small-scale farmers, FAO warned that “The over-arching paradigm of economic growth, considered the highway to secure development, has left the social and environmental dimensions of sustainable development behind.”

Dr Dawson, a senior research associate in UEA’s School of International Development, commented, “Similar results are emerging from other experiments in Africa. Agricultural development certainly has the potential to help people, but instead these policies appear to be exacerbating landlessness and inequality for poorer rural inhabitants.

“Many of these policies have been hailed as transformative development successes, yet that success is often claimed on the basis of weak evidence through inadequate impact assessments. And conditions facing African countries today are very different from those past successes in Asia some 40 years ago.”

‘MODERNISATION’ NOT THE WHOLE ANSWER

Outlining one of the main criticisms with this vision of agriculture and its place in development policies, Dr Dawson added: “Such policies may increase aggregate production of exportable crops, yet for many of the poorest smallholders they strip them of their main productive resource, land. [My research] details how these imposed changes disrupt subsistence practices, exacerbate poverty, impair local systems of trade and knowledge, and threaten land ownership. It is startling that the impacts of policies with such far-reaching impacts for such poor people are, in general, so inadequately assessed.”

The research looked in-depth at Rwanda’s agricultural policies and the changes impacting the wellbeing of rural inhabitants in eight villages in the Country’s mountainous west. Here chronic poverty is common and people depend on the food they are able to grow on their small plots.

Farmers traditionally cultivated up to 60 different types of crops, planting and harvesting in overlapping cycles to prevent shortages and hunger. However, due to high population density in Rwanda’s hills, agricultural policies have been imposed which force farmers to modernise with new seed varieties and chemical fertilisers, to specialise in single crops and part with “archaic” agricultural practices.

Dr Dawson and his UEA coauthors Dr Adrian Martin and Prof Thomas Sikor recommend that not only should green revolution policies be subject to much broader and more rigorous impact assessments, but that mitigation for poverty-exacerbating impacts should be specifically incorporated into such policies. In Rwanda, in their view, that would mean encouraging land access for the poorest and supporting traditional practices during a gradual and voluntary shift.

Farming

‘Poor decision’ New Creamston housing condition overturned

Published

5 hours ago

December 4, 2025

Bruce Sinclair - Local Democracy Reporter

A “POOR DECISION” agricultural worker-only imposed nearly 40 years ago has been removed from a Pembrokeshire property by county planners.

In an application recommended to be approved at the December meeting of Pembrokeshire County council’s planning committee, Tim and Cathy Arthur sought permission for the removal of an agricultural worker-only condition at New Creamson, Creamston Road, near Haverfordwest.

An officer report for members said the agricultural condition was imposed when the dwelling was built in 1988/89, with a later certificate of lawful development granted this year after it was proven the site had been occupied for more than 10 years on breach of that condition.

An application for a certificate of lawfulness allows an applicant to stay at a development if they can provide proof of occupancy over a prolonged period.

Speaking at the meeting, agent Andrew Vaughan-Harries of Hayston Developments & Planning Ltd told members the original agriculture-only condition was a poor decision by planners back nearly four decades ago.

“When this application was made in 1988-89 we go back to the Preseli District Council – I was still in school – it was only a 50-acre farm, it should never have been approved as it shouldn’t have been viable.

“The current applicants have owned it for the last 20 years; they’ve tried to grow apples but couldn’t make a go of it and then went in to holiday lets. We can’t enforce redundant conditions from bad decisions made years ago.”

Approval was moved by Cllr Brian Hall and unanimously supported by committee members.

Business

Cwm Deri Vineyard Martletwy holiday lets plans deferred

Published

19 hours ago

December 4, 2025

Bruce Sinclair - Local Democracy Reporter

CALLS to convert a former vineyard restaurant in rural Pembrokeshire which had been recommended for refusal has been given a breathing space by planners.

In an application recommended for refusal at the December meeting of Pembrokeshire County Council’s planning committee, Barry Cadogan sought permission for a farm diversification and expansion of an existing holiday operation through the conversion of the redundant former Cwm Deri vineyard production base and restaurant to three holiday lets at Oaklea, Martletwy.

It was recommended for refusal on the grounds of the open countryside location being contrary to planning policy and there was no evidence submitted that the application would not increase foul flows and that nutrient neutrality in the Pembrokeshire Marine SAC would be achieved within this catchment.

An officer report said that, while the scheme was suggested as a form of farm diversification, no detail had been provided in the form of a business case.

Speaking at the meeting, agent Andrew Vaughan-Harries of Hayston Developments & Planning Ltd, after the committee had enjoyed a seasonal break for mince pies, said of the recommendation for refusal: “I’m a bit grumpy over this one; the client has done everything right, he has talked with the authority and it’s not in retrospect but has had a negative report from your officers.”

He said the former Cwm Deri vineyard had been a very successful business, with a shop and a restaurant catering for ‘100 covers’ before it closed two three years ago when the original owner relocated to Carmarthenshire.

He said Mr Cadogan then bought the site, farming over 36 acres and running a small campsite of 20 spaces, but didn’t wish to run a café or a wine shop; arguing the “beautiful kitchen” and facilities would easily convert to holiday let use.

He said a “common sense approach” showed a septic tank that could cope with a restaurant of “100 covers” could cope with three holiday lets, describing the nitrates issue as “a red herring”.

He suggested a deferral for further information to be provided by the applicant, adding: “This is a big, missed opportunity if we just kick this out today, there’s a building sitting there not creating any jobs.”

On the ‘open countryside’ argument, he said that while many viewed Martletwy as “a little bit in the sticks” there was already permission for the campsite, and the restaurant, and the Bluestone holiday park and the Wild Lakes water park were roughly a mile or so away.

He said converting the former restaurant would “be an asset to bring it over to tourism,” adding: “We don’t all want to stay in Tenby or the Ty Hotel in Milford Haven.”

While Cllr Nick Neuman felt the nutrients issue could be overcome, Cllr Michael Williams warned the application was “clearly outside policy,” recommending it be refused.

A counter-proposal, by Cllr Tony Wilcox, called for a site visit before any decision was made, the application returning to a future committee; members voting seven to three in favour of that.

Farming

Farmers Union of Wales Warns: Labour’s 5G Expansion Risks Rural Blackspots

Published

2 days ago

December 3, 2025

Tom Sinclair

FUW Joins Landowners in Urgent Call to Pause Controversial Telecoms Reforms

THE FUW (Farmers’ Union of Wales) has warned that rural communities face worsening mobile blackspots and farmers risk losing essential income if the Labour Government expands a telecoms policy blamed for stalling Britain’s 5G rollout.

In a letter to Digital Economy Minister Liz Lloyd, the FUW aligns with landowners, investors, and property experts demanding a halt to Part 2 of the Product Security and Telecommunications Infrastructure (PSTI) Act 2022. Extending the 2017 Electronic Communications Code (ECC) would “entrench failure,” the group argues, sparking more stalled renewals, site losses, and legal battles just as Wales needs swifter rural connectivity.

The 2017 reforms empowered operators to cut mast rents—often by 90%—from hosts like farmers, councils, and NHS trusts. Far from boosting rollout, they’ve ignited over 1,000 tribunal cases since 2017, versus 33 in the prior three decades. Rural goodwill has eroded, with hosts now eyeing exits.

“Every lost mast isolates households, schools, and businesses,” the FUW states. “No public subsidy can fix this systemic damage.”

A survey of 559 hosts (via NFU, CLA, BPF) shows:

35% considering full withdrawal.
70% of expired lease holders facing operator legal threats.

Landowner Ted Hobbs in New Tredegar shares the pain: “My 1995 Vodafone lease was £3,500 yearly, renewed in 2010 at the same rate. It expired May 2025—now they demand a slash, backed by the Code. This is confiscation, not partnership.”

Labour’s push forward—despite earlier opposition and a critical consultation—ignores these red flags.

FUW President Ian Rickman adds: “Farmers hosted masts in good faith for rural connectivity. Punishing them with rent cuts sabotages Wales. Halt this now, restore trust, and incentivise real progress.”

The coalition urges ministers to reopen dialogue before deepening rural divides. Wales can’t afford more policy missteps.