Food Security Situation in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Province a case Study by Allah Dad Khan
-
Upload
mrallah-dad-khan -
Category
Education
-
view
126 -
download
2
Transcript of Food Security Situation in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Province a case Study by Allah Dad Khan
Food Security Food Security
With Reference to National Program for Food With Reference to National Program for Food SecuritySecurity
A Case Study A Case Study Productivity Enhancement of Small Farmers in Productivity Enhancement of Small Farmers in
1012 Villages1012 Villages
CMP II ProjectCMP II ProjectMr. Allah Dad Khan Mr. Allah Dad Khan
Provincial Project DirectorProvincial Project DirectorNWFP NWFP
Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Livestock Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Livestock IslamabadIslamabad
Dated 5Dated 5thth March 2009 at PARD Peshawar March 2009 at PARD Peshawar
Food SecurityFood SecurityFood SecurityFood Security
“Food security exists when all
people, at all times, have both
physical and economic access
to enough safe and nutritious
food to meet their dietary
needs and food preferences for
an active and healthy lifestyle." (World food summit 1996)
Food Security
Food Security Issue ??Food Security Issue ??•
Food is one of the basic rights of the people to live and adequate nutrition is essential for human development.
• It is the primary responsibility of the state, to ensure that people have physical and economic access, to safe food.
• However, it does not imply the state to simply feed its people, but to protect the rights of individuals to feed themselves, through adequate food availability and access which includes seasonal, regional and prices stability.
• Food security on one hand is fundamental right and state’s responsibility, while on the other hand addressing the issue at national and household levels.
• Availability of sufficient quantities of food is necessary although not sufficient condition, but depends upon food supply, household’s own production, other domestic outputs, commercial imports and food assistance.
Food Crisis Global obligationFood Crisis Global obligation• Fighting hunger , reducing poverty and ensuring
food security is Pakistan global obligation.• Therefore ensuring availability of ample food
through increasing productivity and reducing poverty by increasing farm income of small and poor farmers , are of the highest priority issues for the Government.
• Under this scenario performance of agriculture sector need to be enhanced further as there is lot more potential in this sector which has not yet been realized
Poverty and Food SecurityPoverty and Food Security
• Poverty and food security in the country are interlinked thus affecting adversely the buying power of the consumer.
• The decade has witnessed an increasing poverty and food security all over the world.
• This challenge has gained more intensity and importance in the presence of high population growth rates, increasing
Agriculture Poverty Nexus ??Agriculture Poverty Nexus ??
The major reasons for higher poverty rates in rural areas are: • Higher proportion of landless people involved in low paid jobs or
remain unemployed during most part of the year.
• Division of land due to heir system resulting in fragmentation of land and generation of small farmers with poor resources,
• Lack of opportunities for work and even self-employment possibilities, above all, poor rural economy gives birth to high rural poverty.
• In fact, agriculture has strong nexus with poverty and most poverty is rural based.
Food Security a World Challenge (FAOFood Security a World Challenge (FAO)) • Reducing food insecurity, vulnerability and malnutrition is central to
the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and the World Food Summit
• Targets. Commitment towards and achievement of these goals and targets remain a major challenge for the world’s community and Asia in particular.
• The MDGs with their related time-bound targets and indicators are designed as an agenda for action by countries with support from the international community.
• FAO currently is reviewing how its own activities can assist countries in the urgent and ambitious effort of meeting the MDGs, and complement the work of UN partners.
Food Security Focused onFood Security Focused on
• Sustainable food security, increasing productivity, promoting commercial agriculture, encouraging income diversification intervention and export orientation and promotion.
• Raising productivity and profitability of the farming community enabling the country to raise living standard of the small farmers.
Production-Security-Natural Resource Production-Security-Natural Resource ConnectionsConnections
• The links between sustainable agriculture and food security are summarized in Figure 1.
• This shows how achieving food security depends on ensuring that three key conditions are fulfilled:
• Sustainable food .production through the use of regenerative technologies, the full participation of farmers and pastoralists in the processes of planning, research and extension;
• A conserved natural resource base through approaches, practices an d technologies that build upon and enhance the health and diversity of available natural resources without depleting them;
• Entitlements or access to food through approaches which strengthen local capacity and build strong and diversified rural economies.
Sustainable Agriculture and Food Security: Sustainable Agriculture and Food Security: Making the Link figure 1Making the Link figure 1
Seven Investments for Enhancing Seven Investments for Enhancing
Sustainable AgricultureSustainable Agriculture • Recognize the importance of sustainable agriculture for
food security, by:• Promoting sustainable agriculture and resource-
conserving technologies and practices.• Supporting national policies and strategies for
sustainable agriculture.• Redirecting subsides and grants towards sustainable
technologies and practices.• Reforming teaching and training establishments to
encourage the formal adoption of participatory methods and processes.
• Developing farmer-centered research and extension • Improving rural infrastructure to ensure access to
markets with positive price incentives.
Strategies for food security and Strategies for food security and food safety Contdfood safety Contd
• Promotion of conjunctive water use and substitution of high delta water crops with low delta crops.
• Promotion of water saving technologies.• Appropriate and timely availability of inputs, services and
institutional agricultural credit.• Improving farm to market roads and existing markets
and establishment of new markets/markets information system.
• Support price mechanism; continuation of programmes to control salinity and water logging .
• Ensuring compliance to WTO requirements to maintain competitiveness of agricultural products.
Importance of Agriculture in Importance of Agriculture in Economy of Pakistan: Economy of Pakistan:
• :
• Agriculture is a priority area addressing problems of unemployment, poverty alleviation and food security.
• 67% of country’s population live in rural area and are dependent on agriculture directly or indirectly.
• Contributing about 22% in national Gross Domestic Product (GDP). It comprises of crops, livestock, fisheries and forestry sub-sectors having share of 46.2%, 50.8%, 1.3% and 1.6%, respectively
• It employs about 44.8% of the total labour force It contributes about 68% to the foreign exchange earnings through exports of raw material and value added products.
• More than 50% industry is agro-based. • It supplies raw material to various industries
Top Ten Wheat Producers — 2005 (million metric ton)
China 96
India 72
United States 57
Russia 46
France 37
Canada 26
Australia 24
Germany 24
Pakistan 22
Turkey 21
World Total 626Source: UN Food & Agriculture Organisation (FAO)[28]
Land Mass Pakistan Land Mass Pakistan
Pakistan
Geographical Area 79.61
Reported Area 59.33
Cultivable Area 21.96
Cultivable Waste 9.17
Cultivable Waste 8.95
Irrigated Area 18.04
Area Million Hec
Land Mass Land Mass
• 93% of the farmers in the country are small and medium having 61% of the cultivated area
• Large farmers are 7% holding 39% of the cultivated area
• Small farmers have up to 5.0 hectares of landholdings.
• Medium farmers have more than 5.0 hectares
and up to 10.0 hectares of landholdings.
Area & Production of Major Food Crops, 2006-07 in Area & Production of Major Food Crops, 2006-07 in Pakistan .Pakistan . Area in Hectares000
Production in Tones000
Name of Crop Area Production
1. Wheat 8493.900 23520.000
2. Maize 1043.940 2906.780
8. Rice 2581.500 5438.520
31864.52
Source Year Book Pakistan Agri
Demand of food cropsDemand of food crops
Population Rate kg /annum
Total Demand Total Production of all grains
Deficit
180.000 milion
150kg 27.000 million tons
31.864 tons 8.000 million tons
As Maize is used as Feed and Industrial Crop , Rice is exported, wheat also smuggled and mismanaged
Wheat Yield Compared with other Wheat Yield Compared with other countries/countries/
Crop Yield per acre in mds
Pakistan
Country Production /ac in mds
Wheat 21 France 68
Maize 15 Egypt 80
Rice 24 America 88
Yield Gap of Various Crops in Pakistan: Average v. Potential Yield
CommodityPotential Yield Average Yield Yield Gap Unachieved Potential
(Kilograms per Hectare) (Percent)
Wheat 6,425 1,695 4,730 74
Paddy 9,489 1,703 7,786 82
Maze 6,944 1,272 5,672 82
Sugar Cane 256,000 35,672 220,328 86
Rape & Mustard 2,743 641 2,102 77
Potato 38,128 10,403 27,725 73
Source: G.R. Sandhu, Sustainable Agriculture: A Pakistan National Conservation Strategy SectorPaper (Karachi: IUCN-World Conservation Union, 1993), 3.
Causes of low Yield inCauses of low Yield in
• Higher rates of agriculture inputs Weak Agriculture research System.
• Access to modern technology.
• Lack of Investment in agriculture
• Special calamities.
• Support price to farmers inadequate.
KEY Challenges to Food Crisis inKEY Challenges to Food Crisis in • Dependency on one single crop of wheat as staple food .• Wide yield gap between progressive and average farmer.• Increasing water scarcity and inefficient use of available water.• Degradation of land resources ( water logging and salinity)• Inefficient transfer of technology to farmers.• Weak agriculture Research and Agriculture Extension
Services.• Poor rural infrastructure poor people in rural areas are directly
or indirectly dependent on agriculture for their livelihood..• Poverty in rural areas is very high. About 32% in rural areas
and 22% in urban areas live under poverty line and are subjected to food insecurity.
• .
Main approaches to over come Main approaches to over come food crisisfood crisis
• Complete participatory approach under farmer's leadership.• Empowerment of farming communities through establishment of
farming organization , FSC,s VO,s• Equitable use of natural resources and their conservation.• Enhancing crop productivity through input management
• Improving income of small and poor farmers through income diversification interventions.
• Organizing agriculture and livestock extension services at village level through group extension approach.
• Human resource development ( farmers and field staff)• Marketing of the produce and linkages development.• Sustainability through establishing Revolving Fund in each village.
• Case Study which leads to CMP II
FAO Supported Pilot Food FAO Supported Pilot Food Security ProjectSecurity Project
To Be Food Secure Means that:To Be Food Secure Means that:To Be Food Secure Means that:To Be Food Secure Means that:
• Food is available – producing enough to eat
• Availability is necessary but not enough to ensure
access,
which is necessary but not enough for effective
use.
• Food is accessible – having enough to eat
• Food is used – for ending hidden hunger
– Hidden hunger can cause illness, blindness and
pre-mature death.
Back Ground Back Ground Back Ground Back Ground
• 1st Pilot Project
• As a follow-up of World
Food Summit Declaration
1996,
a Pilot Project on Food
Security was launched (1998-2002) (cost: Rs 15.0 million)
Results: Pilot ProjectResults: Pilot Project
Crop Locations
Yield (Tons/ha) Area/No of farmers
% increase in productivity
Over benchmark
Benchmark Project
Wheat Sargodha
Daska
D. I. Khan
2.89
2.62
1.70
4.84
4.27
4.47
500 (72)
600 (87)
100 (17)
68.2
61.6
162.9
Basmati
IRRI
Daska
D. I. Khan
2.67
2.50
4.01
4.85
680 (92)
100 (17)
50.3
125.6
• Results at 3 locations were almost similar and more than Results at 3 locations were almost similar and more than projected, i.e., production increased by 60-100% and income projected, i.e., production increased by 60-100% and income almost doubled almost doubled
Results of Pilot ProjectResults of Pilot Project
Up-scaling National Up-scaling National Program Program
on Food Securityon Food Security to 109 villages to 109 villages (CMP-I)(CMP-I)
22ndnd CMP I Project CMP I Project
• Implementation of ProgramCMP I • After successful completion of pilot project in 1998-2002,
Government of Pakistan (through Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Livestock (MINFAL) allocated Rs 500 million (US$ 8.47 million) for the expansion of the pilot SPFS to 109 villages in 20 union councils of 15 districts through a four years national program called the Crop Maximization Project (CMP). This project was executed by MINFAL in collaboration with the provincial Governments of Punjab, Sindh, NWFP, Balochistan and State of Azad Jammu and Kashmir from July 2002 to June, 2006. Beneficiary households aggregated to 1,400 (10,000 people) and the area to be benefited totaled at 95,999 acres. The strategy, approach, principles and physical components and targets of the CMP were to be essentially the same as the SPFS.
• PC I approved by ECNEC on 3rd May 2002
Performance of up-scaled ProjectPerformance of up-scaled Project::
• Despite many odds due to change in the design of the project, especially in the credit disbursement, the project gave positive results by increasing productivity from 20% to 50% in an area of more than 90,000 acres under various crops. The key lessons learnt from the SPFS/CMP experience were that ownership at the local level is critical for success and that the VOs can play major role in bringing about rural change and development.
• . Such support has to be in the form of specific empowerment, legal status to implement its mandate, creation of technical, administrative and management skills, as well as some catalytic seed money for creating common assets and facilities for establishing a revolving fund to finance income earning activities.
Crop Maximization Project - ICrop Maximization Project - ICrop Maximization Project - ICrop Maximization Project - I
Project Components No. of Villages
FMCU, MINFAL -
Punjab 49
Sindh 28
NWFP 13
Balochistan 14
AJK 5
FATA 0
Total: 109
CM
P-I
CM
P-I
Low Performance ReasonsLow Performance ReasonsLow Performance ReasonsLow Performance Reasons
Pilot Project
Inputs through VOs on delayed payment Inputs given in kind
Revolving fund was created in 2rd year
Farmers empowered to operate RF
Farmers participation high (80%)
CMP-I
Credit through Bank for inputs
Mostly cash was given
Creation of RF was not possible
VOs Empowerment Partial
Framers Participation low (25 – 30%)
CM
P-I
CM
P-I
Percent Increase in productivity of various crops sown Percent Increase in productivity of various crops sown under CMP I 2003-04 on bench markunder CMP I 2003-04 on bench mark
District Wheat yield obtained
Mds /ac
Production BM Mds/Ac
Wheat % increase Over BM
Gujranwala 31.1 25.6 21.1
Muzaffar Garh 18.9 15.4 22.44
Sargodha 35.2 26.0 35.5
Sahiwal 32.4 25.7 25.9
Sialkot 36.6 24.3 50.0
R.Yar Khan 26.6 18.9 40.7
Larkana 24.0 19.6 22.4
Sangar 16.4 15.1 8.5
Nawab Shah 33.5 22.9 46.3
Tando Allah Yar - - -
Bannu 20.4 15.9 28.3
Di Khan 25.5 21.9 16.4
Jafar Abad 23.6 18.0 31.1
Loralai 25.2 17.7 42.3
Muzaffar Abad 19.8 12.0 64.7
Mean Increase 26.5 21.2 25.0
Range of percent increase in productivity of various crops Range of percent increase in productivity of various crops sown under CMP I( Crop yield mds/Ac) 2003-04sown under CMP I( Crop yield mds/Ac) 2003-04
District Wheat Min Wheat Max
Gujranwala 29.00 33.5
Muzaffar Garh 16.7 23.2
Sargodha 34.2 35.4
Sahiwal 29.1 34.5
Sialkot 31.6 43.4
R.Yar Khan 24.5 38.0
Larkana 13.0 30.0
Sangar 15.1 18.0
Nawab Shah 30.2 37.4
Tando Allah Yar - -
Bannu 18.2 20.0
Di Khan 24.0 27.0
Jafar Abad 22.3 24.5
Loralai 25.0 26.0
Muzaffar Abad 15.0 24.0
Productivity Enhancement Model Productivity Enhancement Model
( Sargodha Model( Sargodha Model))
Tech. Interventions
Crop Management
Water Management
Income Generation - Livestock- Fisheries- Off-season vegetable - Nursery raising- Milk collection - Poultry farming
Technical Assistance
Technology Package
Training and Skill Enhancement
- Community Organization & Empowerment- Enhanced Productivity - Employment Generation
- More Income- Food Security & Poverty Reduction
Farming Community & Farming System
Community Mobilization
Establishment of VO
Financial Assistance
Input
Output
Group Extension
Special Program for Food Security and Productivity
Enhancement of Small Farmers
in 1012 Villages
Crop Maximization Project–II (CMP–II)
33rdrd Project ProjectCMP IICMP II
• The SPFS ( CMP II) has now been upscale in the form of National Program for Food Security covering 1012 villages in 26 districts of the four provinces, AJK, FATA & FANA from the current financial year (2007-08). The total cost of the project for five years is Rs 8013 million
MTDF And Food Security MTDF And Food Security
• Under MTDF, GOP has set Goals to maintain an annual growth rate of 4-5% up to 2015. Crop sector overall growth targets have been fixed at 4% (Cotton 5.3%, Wheat 3.5%, and Rice 3.4%), horticulture 8% and Livestock 6.5% (Milk 8%, Meat 5%and Fisheries 4.8%). To achieve the above said goals MINFAL has adopted the following agriculture development strategy:
• Diversification to horticulture, livestock and fisheries• Enhancing productivity by narrowing yield gap, especially of small
farmers.• Demand driven research and new technologies• High efficiency irrigation.• Fair price to farmers• Market infrastructure development• Compliance with international quality standards.
Sponsoring Agency :
Government of Pakistan, Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Livestock, Islamabad
Execution: Provincial Agriculture Department
Operation and Maintenance:
District Governments throughGovernment of NWFP
Concerned Federal Ministry:
Ministry of Food, Agriculture & Livestock
Project Period: 2007-08 ton 2011-12
Project ProfileProject ProfileProject ProfileProject ProfileCost (Rs billion) 8.013
Duration (year) 5 (2007-12)
Project area 26 districts
Implementation and coordination
MINFAL
Execution Provincial/District Govts
Area (acres) 500,000
Villages 1012
Farming households 55,000
Number of beneficiaries 368,000
CM
P-I
IC
MP
-II
Changes in Project Approach Changes in Project Approach Changes in Project Approach Changes in Project Approach
• Restoring the original Sargodha Model
and establishing revolving fund at
village level to be operated by VOs to
provide inputs on deferred payment and
loans for income generation activities
• Component of developing marketing
linkages added
• More emphasis on income generation
activities
CM
P-I
IC
MP
-II
INPUTS
Financial Assistance
Technical Assistance
Time-tested & Proven Technologies
Training & Skill Enhancement
Global GAP / Better Management
Practices
Community Mobilization
Establishment of VOs
OUTPUTS
Revolving Fund
Input Sales / Marketing Centres
Farm Machinery Pools
Small EnterprisesIncome
Diversification
Community Organization
& Empowerment
Productivity Enhancemen
t
Income Increase
Employment Generation
Poverty Reduction
Food Security
SMALL FARMERS &
RESOURCE-POOR FARMING COMMUNITY
1. Increase food production in the country through enhancing crop and livestock productivity.
2. Ensure food security and reduce poverty through improving income of small farmers through productivity enhancement and income generation interventions.
3. Objectives are in line with 1. Medium term development frame work.2. Poverty reduction strategy3. Millennium development goal.
CMP II Project StrategyCMP II Project Strategy
• Focus on small farmers• Complete participatory approach• One village as a production unit• Multidisciplinary and integrated approach• Using time tested technologies• Productivity and income enhancement• Commercializing agriculture.• Ensuring cost sharing by farmers.• Farming community empowerment.
A. Farming Community Mobilization Organization and Empowerment
B. Crop / farm management
C. Income diversification/ generation.
D. Human resource development,
E. Establishing Market linkages.
Criteria for Selection of VillagesCriteria for Selection of Villages
This project is for small farmers. Farmers having up to 15 acres of land are entitled for the Membership of Village Organization.
All the Villages should be predominantly populated by small farmers The selected villages should have 30 small farmers will to
participate in the Project. The villages should be selected in a cluster of 30 to 40 (in case of
NWFP 32) villages, involving 3 to 8 Union Councils, in a block form and in a contiguous physical territory.
The villages should not have any soil or environmental aliment. Villages should be located in irrigated areas Villages should be easily accessible
Cost Sharing by Cost Sharing by Farmers/beneficiariesFarmers/beneficiaries
Item Cost ShareProject Farmers
Remarks
Inputs Nil 100% Through RF(10% Handling Charges) SOP35000 acres
Implements Pool 80 % 20% VO 20% Rent No Handling Charges (sop) IP 55
Income Diversification
80 % 20% 7% Handling Charges to Vo RFRe (sop) ID 560
Animal Health Care Unit
100 % ==== Free of interest After grace period of 6 months return loan in 24 installments AHU 20
Media CoverageMedia CoverageFor Mass AwarenessFor Mass Awareness
ToT & Farmers' ToT & Farmers' Training Training
through FFSsthrough FFSs
CoordinationCoordination& Monitoring& MonitoringLong / Short TrainingLong / Short Training
MeetingsMeetingsWith Various DepartmentsWith Various Departments
Training Training WorkshopsWorkshops
Strategic Strategic DocumentsDocuments
Training Training MaterialMaterial
CMP-IICMP-II
Components, Villages and CostComponents, Villages and Cost
Project Components No. of Villages
Amount
(Rs million)
FMCU, MINFAL - 673
Punjab 430 3269
Sindh 230 1607
NWFP 160 1111
Balochistan 150 1067
AJK 40 269
FATA 2 15
Total: 1012 8013
PROJECT COSTPROJECT COST( 2007-08 to 2011-12)( 2007-08 to 2011-12)
Item Total Pakistan NWFP %age Share NWFP
Estt & Operational Charges
1966.304 305.298 15.52 %
Capacity Building/ social mobilization
1476.994 155.568 10.53 %
Contingency + Transfer Grant
172.167 + 8.057 23.045 12.78 %
Seed Money/ Revolving Fund
4390.000 627.840 14. 30 %
Total 8013.522 1111. 750 13. 87 %
Expected Output: Expected Output: Additional Benefits Additional Benefits
Expected Output: Expected Output: Additional Benefits Additional Benefits
Item Addl. Income (Rs billion)
Additional income from crops 12.58
Additional income from small enterprises (e.g., Livestock, Fisheries & poultry farms etc.)
1.60
Income from Job creation (No.) 0.72
Additional income in five years of project:
14.9
Annual additional income to farmers after project completion
7.643
CM
P-I
IC
MP
-II
Flow of Funds Flow of Funds Flow of Funds Flow of Funds
Line No 1: Rs 3623 milProject Management
Cost
Federal Government Funding (PSDP) Rs 8013 million
Line No 2: Rs 4390 milRevolving Fund
Beneficiary Farmers - Inputs (in kinds) - Small Enterprises
Revolving Fund of VOsi. Establishment cost ii. Operational costiii. Capital costiv. Capacity building
costv. Technical
backstopping
0.0%
10.0%10%
CM
P-I
IC
MP
-II
Flow of Revolving Fund of Rs 4390 Flow of Revolving Fund of Rs 4390 millionmillion
Flow of Revolving Fund of Rs 4390 Flow of Revolving Fund of Rs 4390 millionmillion
Commercial banks through State Bank
Village Organizations Revolving Fund
Beneficiary Farmers
Federal Government
10%
50% of Principal amount to be returned after 5 years in a period of 5 years
CM
P-I
IC
MP
-II
Further Up-ScalingFurther Up-ScalingFurther Up-ScalingFurther Up-Scaling
15 years
Time scale Villages Cost (Rs billion) 2006-07 = 1000 8.0 2008-09 = 3000 27.0 2010-11 = 3000 31.0 2012-13 = 3000 36.0 2015-19 = 3000 41.0
13000 143.0
CM
P-I
IC
MP
-II
Right to FoodRight to Food
• The Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948 first recognized the right to food as a human right. It was then incorporated in the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (Article 11) adopted in 1966 and ratified by 156 states. The expert interpretation and more refined definition of this right are contained in General Comment 12 of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (1999).
Food is energyFood is energy
• The cost of food is climbing fast. People everywhere are affected, and the poorest are hit hardest. Changing weather patterns and rising demand for biofuels are part of the problem.
• In the search for solutions, let’s remember: