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.

Business

Farmers cautious but resilient as costs remain high across Wales

Published

5 days ago

February 21, 2026

Tom Sinclair

Major supplier says confidence lower despite signs of stability returning

FARMERS across Wales are facing another difficult year as input costs remain significantly higher than before the pandemic, according to new industry insight from agricultural supplier Wynnstay Group.

The company, which has deep roots in rural Wales and generates around sixty per cent of its retail revenue in the country, says confidence among farmers is lower than this time last year, with rising costs, policy uncertainty and tightening margins influencing spending decisions.

However, there are also signs of resilience, with many producers focusing on efficiency and forward planning to cope with ongoing pressures.

Wales at heart of business

Wynnstay, originally founded by tenant farmers in Mid Wales in 1918, has grown into a major UK agricultural supplier serving more than 20,000 farming customers through manufacturing sites, stores and on-farm services. The group employs hundreds of staff across the UK and operates a nationwide distribution network supporting livestock and arable producers.

The company says Welsh farming businesses continue to play a central role in its commercial performance and long-term growth strategy.

Cautious investment decisions

According to Wynnstay, farmers are delaying some investment decisions but are increasingly seeking value-driven solutions that improve productivity.

Feed volumes have increased across the company’s Welsh store network over the past year, reflecting demand for blended feeds that offer greater flexibility and cost control. Rather than reducing purchases outright, many farmers are matching spending more closely to performance and output.

Fertiliser demand has also been strong, with sales ahead of last year, although some farmers have delayed buying in the hope prices may fall. Global supply pressures and rising gas costs mean prices are expected to remain firm into the busy spring season.

Costs still far above pre-Covid levels

Industry data shows overall farm input costs remain significantly higher than before 2020, with feed, fertiliser, fuel, electricity and machinery all continuing to put pressure on farm margins.

While some costs have eased from their peaks, they have not returned to previous levels, influencing buying behaviour across the sector.

Margins for livestock and dairy farms were strong last year, but Wynnstay says they are now tightening, particularly in the dairy sector where milk prices have fallen and volatility remains high.

Pressure on family farms

Smaller family-run farms are under greater strain than larger commercial operations, with less financial resilience to absorb rapid market changes. Reports of rising closures among family farms, particularly in dairy, reinforce concerns about the sector’s long-term sustainability.

Government policy changes are also contributing to uncertainty. The transition away from the Basic Payment Scheme and wider tax reforms have led many farmers to postpone larger investments until there is clearer long-term stability.

Local reaction

Pembrokeshire farmer Chris James said the situation reflected what many farmers were experiencing locally.

“We’ve definitely noticed the squeeze over the past year or two,” he said. “Costs for feed, fertiliser and fuel are still much higher than they used to be, and that makes you think twice about every decision. Most farmers I know aren’t cutting back on production — they’re just trying to be more efficient and careful with spending.”

He added: “People want to invest and move forward, but it’s hard when you don’t know exactly what the long-term policy picture will look like.”

NFU Cymru has also warned that rising costs and policy uncertainty continue to weigh heavily on farm businesses across Wales, with confidence affected by concerns over future support schemes and wider economic challenges. The union has called for greater long-term certainty to allow farmers to invest with confidence and maintain domestic food production.

Weather shocks impact behaviour

Extreme weather during 2025 — including a very dry spring followed by periods of intense heat and a challenging wet autumn — also affected purchasing patterns, with farmers spacing orders and prioritising essential inputs as conditions changed.

Ordering behaviour is now returning to more normal patterns as conditions stabilise.

Outlook for 2026

Despite ongoing pressures, Wynnstay says it is cautiously optimistic about the year ahead.

Many farmers are making careful decisions around efficiency, nutrition and planning, and the company believes there are opportunities for businesses to strengthen their position through 2026 with good cost control and smart investment.

Summing up the sector, the company said Welsh agriculture remains resilient, with farmers showing determination and adaptability despite continuing challenges.

Farming

Growing fodder beet could be attractive option after difficult 2025 forage season

Published

5 days ago

February 21, 2026

Rieve Nesbitt-Marr

AFTER the lack of forage in many areas in 2025 due to the drought, this season could see increased interest in growing fodder beet on livestock farms, believes ProCam agronomist, Nick Duggan.

Once fodder beet gets its roots down, it can be quite drought tolerant, says Nick, so it could appeal to farmers looking to diversify forage crops to mitigate risk.

“Although inputs can be quite high, fodder beet does offer a big crop of energy,” explains Nick, who operates in Herefordshire, South Shropshire, Powys and the Cotswolds.

“Compared with stubble turnips yielding about 4-6t of dry matter/ha (DM/ha), fodder beet might yield 20t DM/ha. And, at around 12.5ME, the energy content of its roots is similar to grass.

“There’s also the flexibility to feed fodder beet to sheep, beef or dairy, and to lift or graze it, although it’s important to ‘wean’ livestock onto it gradually, especially cattle, because its high energy content can cause acidosis,” he adds.

To help ensure that farmers grow the right varieties for their situation based on robust data, Nick says ProCam has been evaluating the performance of fodder beet varieties over multiple seasons, with on-farm trials conducted in the North and West of the country as well as other locations country wide.

“We test a range of varieties,” he continues. “These range from low DM beets for grazing, to high energy types for lifting and chopping for livestock, or for use in anaerobic digestion (AD) plants.

“Typically, 20 or so varieties might be tested annually in these replicated trial plots, with 4-5 new varieties included each year. But a lot of the established varieties have been in the trial for maybe six years – so we have long term data and can robustly benchmark new varieties.”

Assessments begin with variety emergence and vigour, and conclude at harvest by measuring yields, says Nick, with beets lifted and tops and roots weighed separately. Yields per hectare are then calculated, corrected for %DM.

“Also at harvest, each variety is assessed for disease resilience, and for the amount of root protruding above the soil. More root protruding is helpful if grazing. If lifting beet, you want more root in the ground for protection from frost.

“Agronomically, we encourage all farmers to keep the tops as healthy as possible with a summer nutrition programme. As well as helping to protect roots from frost, a healthy canopy helps sustain the crop into winter. This helps if growing for energy for AD plants, but also tops have good feed value, at about 17% crude protein, and can provide 2-2.5t DM/ha.”

In addition to evaluating varieties, ProCam also evaluates the performance of primed seed, says Nick, which is available with certain fodder beet varieties. Primed seed is pre-germinated for faster emergence, and tends to produce more uniform plants at the cotyledon stage, he notes.

“Faster establishment, in turn, helps with weed suppression, and once fodder beet reaches 12 leaves, it becomes more tolerant to virus yellows.

“Plus, primed seed can deliver higher yields. Results can vary, but in five years of trials on the variety Geronimo we saw a yield uplift of approximately 1.5t DM/ha from Active Boost primed seed compared with conventional seed.

“With the unpredictable spring weather we get nowadays, I think primed seed is extremely useful technology for fodder beet growers.”

Photo caption: Fodder beet offers a big crop of energy, and once it gets its roots down it can be quite drought tolerant, says ProCam agronomist, Nick Duggan

Farming

Deputy First Minister raises concerns over fishing funds and farm policy

Published

5 days ago

February 21, 2026

Tom Sinclair

Funding formula and visa rules among key issues discussed ahead of Senedd election period

THE WELSH Government has voiced concerns over fishing funding allocations, farm policy, and potential labour shortages during a recent UK-wide ministerial meeting on rural affairs.

Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Secretary for Climate Change and Rural Affairs, Huw Irranca-Davies, attended the latest Inter-Ministerial Group for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs meeting on Wednesday (Feb 5), alongside ministers from the UK, Scottish and Northern Ireland governments.

One of the main topics was the UK Fishing and Coastal Growth Fund. Ministers from devolved administrations expressed disappointment that the Barnett formula had been used to determine allocations, arguing it failed to reflect the size and importance of the fishing sector in each nation or previous funding levels.

Talks also covered progress on negotiations for a UK-EU sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) agreement, which could affect cross-border trade in food, plants and animals. Devolved governments welcomed engagement from the UK Government so far but stressed the need for continued cooperation, particularly around biosecurity and the legislative process required to implement any agreement across the UK.

Ministers also discussed the UK Government’s Farm Profitability Review — known as the Batters Review — and the emerging UK Food Strategy. Although these policies apply mainly to England, ministers noted they could still have implications for Wales and other devolved nations, highlighting the need for collaborative working.

A joint approach to banning peat use in horticulture was also agreed in principle, with the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) expected to set out possible timelines.

Concerns were also raised about proposed changes to UK work visa rules, which ministers warned could worsen shortages of seasonal agricultural workers, particularly sheep shearers. UK Government ministers acknowledged the risks and said discussions were ongoing.

The next meeting of the Inter-Ministerial Group is scheduled for March 2026, ahead of the upcoming elections in both Wales and Scotland.