The Role of the EU in Supporting the Agricultural Sector

Speakers: David Walker, Natural Resources Institute, University of Greenwich
                Tom Vandenbosch, International Center for Research in Agro-Forestry (ICRAF)
                Richard Hodges, Natural Resources Institute, University of Greenwich
 
Discussants: Claire Gaudot, DG Development, European Commission
                    Gerhard Schmalbruch, Secretary General, EuronAid
                    Maria Karjalainen, Policy Officer, Education and Training, DG Development, European Commission
 
Chair: Johan F.M. Swinnen, Senior Fellow, CEPS, Professor, University of Leuven.
 
Date: 22 June 2006
 
The speakers presented the results and recommendations of two studies prepared within the framework of the European Community’s Poverty Reduction Effectiveness Programme, financed by the Department for International Development of the United Kingdom. Two officials from DG Development of the European Commission also intervened, to react to the findings of the studies and outline the EC’s position concerning food aid and education in developing countries, and more specifically in Africa. Very early on, agricultural development was identified as a political issue not only for the EU, but at the international level.
 
Prof. David Walker, from the Natural Resources Institute at the University of Greenwich (UK) initiated his presentation on “Policy implications arising from the Development impact of Local and Regional Procurement of Food Aid by emphasising the fact that food aid can have a positive impact on the development of the recipient countries at both local and regional levels. After providing brief definitions of the two existing kinds of food aid (tied and untied), he pointed to the greater long term benefits of untied food aid. In order to justify his position, Mr. Walker discussed the Natural Resources Institute’s work and offered two examples of case studies: Uganda and Ethiopia. The organization’s hypothesis was that local and regional procurement of food aid can make a much more significant contribution to the developing countries’ economies and the livelihoods of the poor.
Walker explained that, given a level of financial resources, developing countries can buy up to three times more foodstuffs at a regional or local level than by importing commodities from donors. Despite the benefits that untied aid brings to developing countries, such as the creation of a large remunerative market and investment in national grain industries, many cons were highlighted by the speaker. Among others, he mentioned the fact that food aid benefits to very few companies. Besides, no significant improvement in the functioning of the supply chain has been noticed over the past few years.
 
More specifically, on the case studies, Walker stated that the positive effects of food aid were more considerable in Ethiopia than in Uganda, due to the fact that the Ethiopian food security reserve played a key role in local purchasing operations in that country. He continued with some of the Natural Resources Institute's recommendations regarding how food aid policies should support increased local procurement, focus on developing existing marketing systems, and encourage agencies to follow EU's and Canada's example in untying a substantial portion of their food aid. Walker concluded his presentation by confirming his initial hypothesis and by stating that food aid should be regarded as an investment tool for rural development rather than simply as a relief tool to meet the short-term needs of hunger-stricken people.
 
Claire Gaudot, from DG Development of the European Commission, gave an overview of the institution’s policy concerning food aid. During the first part of her presentation she declared herself in agreement with most of the recommendations and conclusions of the study by the Natural Resources Institute. Indeed, the EC concentrates its efforts on supporting development in the target countries, and therefore encourages untied food aid. Diversification of agricultural production and increase in the quality of grains sent to developing countries as a part of the untied food aid were some of the positive effects highlighted by Gaudot. Donors, from the discussant's point of view, should not have any vested interest in providing food aid. The DG Development official also stressed that long term food aid encourages development and strengthens regional and local markets. However, she expressed some reservations with respect to Walker's last conclusion. According to Gaudot, the EC is cautious about regarding food aid as a development tool, due to the fact that donors can easily use it to further their own political and economical interests.
 
Another discussant, Gerhard Schmalbruch from EuronAid, was quick to express his disagreement with the stance taken by Gaudot on the issue. According to his experience and observations, food aid should definitely be seen as a tool for rural development. But, since the flows of food aid are volatile, local standards should be implemented to maximize the benefits at the regional and local levels. Schmalbruch added that the EC had changed its approach towards food aid. It has, in fact, moved from a very broad approach (food aid and food security used to be seen as one and the same) to a narrower one, in order to increase the effectiveness of its programmes. He concluded by remarking how, at the local level, food aid does make a difference.
 
Tom Vandenbosch from the International Center for Research in Agro-Forestry (ICRAF) then presented the study on “The Role of Relevant Basic Education in Achieving Food Security and Sustainable Rural Development that he jointly carried out with colleagues at the University of Leuven, aimed at measuring the relation between education and food security. Both these activities are falling within the Millennium Development Goals, and the speaker tried to demonstrate how they are linked in a bidirectional relation where skills, social opportunities, participation of agencies and many other factors play an important role.
The research hypothesis was that the effects of schooling on food security and sustainable rural development would depend not only on the number of years of study but also on the quality of the education. According to his findings, general productivity increases with the number of years at school. The same pattern has been identified in agriculture, and more specifically in modern agriculture, where relevant basic education has a very positive impact on rural productivity. Therefore, Vandenbosch suggested that, in order to increase local productivity, agricultural and environmental experiences could be used as a way to enrich the basic curricula in rural areas. Educational programs should in his view be tailored to the needs of local communities. Ideally, students would be provided with the knowledge and skills that can be applied locally in agriculture or other trades. According to the speaker, in order to achieve this result, many factors would have to be combined. Among others, Vandenbosch pointed out the importance of the coordination of the fieldwork of donors, the need for school curricula to be more meaningful and representative of local reality, the necessity for teachers’ work to be supported with adequate learning material, and the value of improving school-community linkages. In sum, the Belgian scholar explained, schools should be regarded as multifunctional learning centers.
 
Marja Karjalainen, from DG Development of the European Commission, ended the panel discussion with her remarks on the EC’s approach to education in developing countries. She stressed the need to make education available for everyone at every level of schooling. At the same time, the discussant pointed to the necessity of appropriately financing the educational systems in rural areas as well as to the need to properly train teachers. However, she made it clear that donors would have to perform a very delicate balancing act, in consideration of the fact that education is a sensitive element of national sovereignty and, as such, always closely linked to cultural issues. Many nations want to retain control of their educational systems, and are reluctant to allow excessive foreign influence. Moreover, education systems in the developing regions generally tend to be very conservative. This is in fact the one big challenge that, according to Karjalainen, the EC is presently confronted with.