In affiliation with:

IAAE Inter-Conference Symposium Almaty, Kazakhstan April 2016

Patterns of food consumption and commercialization in

Uzbekistan: A case-study in rural Samarkand

Ms. Lorena Lombardozzi

PhD candidate SOAS Dpt. Of Economics

Outline:

•Theoretical framework & Methodology

•Preliminary results

why this research?

•My past professional experience in the country

•My research interests in Development Economics, structural transformation &

food systems

2

Uzbekistan: an overview

• Uzbekistan is the world's fifth largest cotton exporter and sixth largest producer (the “cotton basket” in Soviet times)

• Cotton export from 65% to 9% of GDP between 1992 and 2012 (WB, 2013)

• Agriculture from 28% to 17% of GDP between 1992 and 2012

• Largest population in the region: 28,929,716 (2014 est.)

• 25-54 years: 43% (male 6,178,921/female 6,255,715)

• 62% population lives in rural areas

• GDP growth rate 7-8% , inflation 9%

• Underweight 5%, Stunting 19%, Wasting 4%, Obesity 19% (Unicef, 2015)

• Vitamin A 99% coverage

3

Uzbek Macro Structural Transformation Against Agriculture?

4

Grain sovereignty achieved in 2003 (FAOSTAT & UNDP)

5

6

Aggregate volume of agricultural production (FAOSTAT)

7

Aggregate data on Dietary Diversity

Main Research Question: What is the relationship between agricultural production dynamics and food consumption patterns in Uzbekistan? HP to be tested: The case study shows no trade-off between cash and food crops

Cash Crops, Food Crops & Staple Food (O'Laughlin, Von Braun, Haddad) -From: subistence agriculture to > commercialization transition -Drivers and Processes: income effects, labor in the HH, food consumption, ..effects can be positive and/or negative It is necessary to understand the variables around the relationship between agrarian production and nutrition security outcomes, meant as a ensemble of :

THEORETHICAL FRAMEWORK 1

10

Commodity Value Chain (Gibbon, Ponte 2006, Barrientos, 2012) To help investigate the interactions of cotton, wheat and F&V with:

INPUTS of production: a)Employment: stratification, diversification, intra-household dynamics

b)Land, fertilizers, irrigation and infrastructures, machineries, credits

OUTPUTS: -Market channels , prices, and non-market dynamics for distribution & exchange

THEORETHICAL FRAMEWORK 2

Methodology : mixed method • Quantitative: farmer survey 3 modules: 1) Assets and socio-econ indexes different levels of demands

2) Commercialization supply dimension + food system of provision

3) Individual Dietary Diversity Index + Food insecurity indic.

Food consumption (focus of the presentation)

• Qualitative: participant observations, unstructured interviews

(seasonality, intra-household dynamics, culture and institutions)

11

The nutrition metrics: methodological considerations on IDDI & FANTA • They allow comparability and reproducibility

• Good to grasp food access & consumption modalities

• FANTA: grasps the food security dimension (30 days recall)

• Individual Dietary Diversity Index: grasps diet composition and quality

16 food groups adapted to the local diet and season (24-hour recall)

• BOTH support the understanding of interplays of food production, distribution and access

• No use of anthropometry because not relevant for the scope of the research, which looks at:

IF and HOW different commercialization degrees of farmers affects diets.

12

The survey: sampling method • Purposive sample: 120 farmer from 9 different districts of Samarkand region

: cotton versus non cotton areas

4 groups:

• 1) cotton farm manager

• 2) F&V farm manager

• 3) Dekhans

• 4) Agrarian wage workers

• Only 3 respondents receive remittances

• Gender balanced, where possible

13

Preliminary Results:

• 1) FOOD KNOWLEDGE (preferences) Question: Which kind of food do you think is good for your health?

14

15

Food Expenditure & Market

What is the % of food bought at the market because you don’t produce:

16

Which food is the most expansive?

17

FOOD Acquisition • Who buys food in your family?

• Gender role in income management: male generally holds food consumption decision

18

In the past month did you have smaller (L) of fewer meals (R)?

19

Food Security

In the past month did you buy food on credit (L)/ borrowed (R)?

20

Food Security

Dark green vegetables are consumed more by Farm Managers Wage farm worker consume less fruits than Dekhans

21

Dietary Diversity: dark green vegetables (L) Fruits (R)

Animal source proteins: Dairy (Left) and Meat (Right) Eggs (down)

22

Cereals (L), and Tubers (R)

23

Only rice

DIET COMPOSITION by groups (%)

24

Wheat F&V farm manager Farm worker Dekhans

Cotton farm manager

Tubers 100 93 83 100Cereals 100 97 100 100Meat 93 77 83 100Dairy&milk 60 67 33 80Fish 10 3 3 6Pulses 59 27 40 60

72 43 77 70Dark Green Vegetables 23 10 3 30

Vegetables 97 40 35 70

Fruits

Final remarks

Agric. wage workers are less dependent on the market for staple food

than dekhans.

Nevertheless, both dekhans and agric. wage workers depend on the

community (credit, borrowing) for food provision

Farm manager, although benefit more from markets & marketed

assets are less dependent on the market for food provision and don’t

buy non-essential food.

Cereal, tubers and roots occupy the biggest share of the diet across

all the groups

Gender plays a key role in the patterns of food provision

25

Limitations & final remarks

Shortage of primary data to compare and contrast

Although nutritional status better grasped in cold seasons,

production and employment changes as well

Female only partially represented in the population sample

The definition of labour and employment is complex ( temporary

jobs)

The non-monetary economy & non-traded goods play a big role

Strong culture and social meanings around the “flex crops”

26

Thank you!

Lorena Lombardozzi

ll27@soas.ac.uk

27