Content uploaded by Roger Blench
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Roger Blench on Jan 07, 2015
Content may be subject to copyright.
Pro-Poor
Livestock
Policy
Initiative
A Study of the Role of Livestock in
Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers
Roger Blench, Robert Chapman and Tom Slaymaker
A Living from
Livestock PPLPI Working Paper No. 1
Pro-Poor
Livestock
Policy
Initiative
A Living from
Livestock PPLPI Working Paper No. 1
A Study of the Role of Livestock in
Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers
Roger Blench, Robert Chapman and Tom Slaymaker
i
PREFACE
This is the first of a series of “Working Papers” prepared by the Pro-Poor Livestock
Policy Initiative. The purpose of this series is to review issues affecting livestock
development in relation to pov erty alleviat ion.
The liv es tock sec tor plays a vital role in the economies of ma ny develo ping countr ies .
It provides food, or more specifically animal protein in human diets, income,
employment and possibly foreign exchange. For low income producers, livestock also
serve as a store of wealth, provide draught power and organic fertiliser for crop
production and a means of transport. Consumption of livestock and livestock products
in the developing countries, though starting from a low base, is growing rapidly.
The c urrent doc ument examines how liv estock featur es in the Pover ty Reduct ion
Strategy Papers (PRSPs) prepared by Heavily Indebted Poor Countries as they seek
concessional lending from the World Bank and IMF. Although the nature and demands
upon livestock differ greatly between countries embarking on the PRSP process, all
fail to make a strong, coherent case for support to this sector. The underlying reason
for this is that the PRSP process is guided by national ministries that fail to recognize
or understand the opportunities that livestock present for reducing poverty. This
Working Paper concludes with recommendations for improving the PRSP process so
that the interests and priorities of the poor are better represented.
It is hoped that the paper stimulates discussion and any feedback would be gratefully
received by the author and the Livestock Information and Policy Branch of the Animal
and Production and Health Division of FAO.
DISCLAIMER
The designations employed and the presentation of material in this publication do not
imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Food and
Agriculture Organization of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any
country , territory or any area or of its authorities, or c oncer ning the delimitation of
its frontiers or boundaries. Opinions expressed in this publication are those of the
authors alone and do not imply any opinion whatsoever on the part of FAO.
KEYWORDS
Agriculture, Livestock, Heavily Indebted Poor Countries, Poverty Reduction Strategy
Papers.
Date of publication: 26 May 2003
For more information please visit the PPLPI website at:
http://www.fao.org/ag/againfo/pr ojects/en/pplpi/home.html
or contact:
Joachim Otte
Project Coordinator , Pro-Poor Livestock Policy Facility
Food and Agr iculture Organization - Animal Production and Health Division
Viale delle Terme di Caracalla, 00100 Rome Italy
Tel: +39 06 57053634
Fax: +39 06 57055749
Email: Joachim.Otte@fao.org - Livestock-Policy@fao.org
ii
CONTENTS
Preface....................................................................................................... i
Acronyms....................................................................................................iii
Tables .......................................................................................................iv
Figures ......................................................................................................iv
Executive Summary........................................................................................ 1
1. Introduction............................................................................................. 3
2. General Analysis of PRSPs – Methodology ........................................................... 5
3. General Analysis of PRSPs - Results .................................................................. 9
3.1 Participation in the PRSP Process................................................................9
3.2 The Contribution of Agriculture to GDP and Employment ................................... 10
3.3 Livestock in the PRSPs.......................................................................... 12
3.4 The Joint Staff Assessments ................................................................... 13
4. Detailed Country Case Studies.......................................................................14
4.1 Niger ............................................................................................ 14
4.2 Ethiopia......................................................................................... 19
4.3 Mozambique.................................................................................... 27
4.4 Lao PDR......................................................................................... 35
4.5 Pakistan ........................................................................................ 41
4.6 Conclusions..................................................................................... 47
Recommendations ........................................................................................49
References.................................................................................................51
iii
ACRONYMS
ADLI Agriculture-Development-Led-Industrialisation
FAO Food and agriculture Organization of the United Nations
FDI Foreign direct investment
FSR Far ming syst ems research
GDP Gross domestic product
HIPC Heavily Indebted Poor Countries
IFAD International Fund for Agricultural Development
IFI I nt ernat ional Fina ncial I nstitution
ILCA International Livestock Centre for Africa
ILRI International Livestock Research Institute
IMF International Monetary Fund
INE I nstitut o Nacional Estatist ico (National St at istics Inst itute,
Mozambique)
JSA Joint Staff Assessment
LPDP Lao Peoples Development Party
MA DER Ministry of Agr iculture and Rur al Dev elo pment
NHDR Niger Human Development Report
ODI Overseas Dev elopment Institute
PPP Purchasing power parit y
PRSPs Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers
PRGF Poverty Reduction and Growth Facility
PROAGRI Agricultural Sector Public Expenditure Programme
SIP Sector invest ment programme
LUs Livestock Units
UNDP United Nations development Programme
UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund
UNFPA United Nations
USAID United States Ag ency for International Development
UX O Unexploded ordnance
WFP W orld Food Programme
iv
TABLES
Table 1: PRSPs - status and significance of livestock within them.......................................5
Table 2: Human population, contribution of agriculture and livestock to GDP and employment and
rating of livestock in PRSP .................................................................... 10
Table 3: Niger country data(1990/2000 compar ison) ................................................... 14
Table 4: Niger agr icultural data(1990/2000 comparison)............................................... 16
Table 5: Niger livestock populations..................................................................... 16
Table 6: Ethiopia country data (1990/2000 comparison) ............................................... 20
Table 7: Et hiopia agricultural data (1993/2000 compar ison)........................................... 21
Table 8: Ethiopian livestock populations ................................................................ 21
Table 9: Mozambique agricultural data (1990/2000 comparison)...................................... 28
Table 10: Mozambique livestock populations............................................................ 30
Table 11: Lao country data (1990/2000 comparison)................................................... 35
Table 12: Lao agricultural data (1990/2000 comparison) .............................................. 36
Table 13. Lao livestock populations...................................................................... 37
Table 14: Pakistan Country data (1990/2000 compar ison) ............................................. 42
Table 15: Pakistan agr icultural data (1990/2000 comparison) ......................................... 43
Table 16: Pakistan: livestock populations ............................................................... 44
FIGURES
Figure 1: Status of the PRSP process....................................................................... 9
Figure 2: Significance attributed to livestock in PRSPs..................................................13
1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Animal Production and Health Division and the Pro-Poor Livestock Policy Facility
of FAO requested ODI to evaluate references to livestock in the available PRSP
documentation. Five case studies examining the role of livestock in the overall
economy would explore the value of the PRSPs in more detail. Primarily, this involved
downloading and searching the documentation for countries entering the HIPC
process. Although sixty-one are recorded as entering the process, documents that can
be evaluated are available for only forty-nine countries. These documents were then
studied t o det er mine the overall i mport ance allo cat ed to livest ock.
The major questions were:
Are the documents based on a realistic and comprehensive understanding of the
economy of the nation-state in question?
Do t hey corr ect ly identify the local and s pecific causes of poverty?
If so, do the strategies proposed address these specific issues as well as broad
structural elements?
A qualitative livestock PRSP rating based on the statements about livestock included
in the PRSP was developed and tabulated against variables such as the proportion of
people deriving an income from agriculture, the proportion of GDP from livestock or
the dynamics of the livestock sector. Regrettably, no consistent connection could be
found bet ween the likely importa nc e of liv estock for a given economy and the
significance attributed to it in the PRSP. For example, some pastoral countries, where
livestock is the mainstay of the subsistence of the majority of the population, such as
Niger or Tajikistan, only refer to livestock in passing. Evidence from both the
documents and from discussions with participants in the PRSP process argue strongly
that the underlying reason for this is lack of representation the overall leadership
style exerted by the ministries of finance in the PRSP process.
The broad conclusions drawn from the in-depth study of five countries were as
follows:
that livestock is generally under-represented in the PRSP process and output
documents
that greater attention is given to commercial operations than to the species and
str uc tur es relev ant t o t he poor
that virtually all recommendations are of extreme generality (‘veterinary services
should be impr oved’) and ar e thus unlik ely to lead to improved outc omes
that in many instances the format of the PRSP process will not lead to realistic
descriptions of the situation of livestock producers
that despite the apparently participatory and consultative nature of the process
the recommendations are mostly central and top-down suggesting that local
opinion may be s ought but is us ually not incorporated int o final documents
that the Joint Staff Assessment (JSA) procedure does not lead to any increased
representation of livestock
Executive Summary
2
In terms of recommendations, the situation can be summarised as follows:
1. L ivestock is g iven a low profile as part of a broader inadequacy in the disc ussion of
natural resource issues. If this profile is to be raised then representation should be
made in conjunction with other sectors and other agencies to the IMF and Wor ld Bank,
pr efer ab ly with the suppor t of s elect ed min istries in HIPC c ountries
2. The profile of livestock should be based on a detailed empir ical ana lys is of recent data
and should reflect livestock issues relevant to the poor rather than those thought to be
the source of economic growth
3. The resources and advocacy of NGOs and similar groups should be drawn upon to
provide a solid factual basis for the recommended changes
If FAO, or indeed any other body, wishes to make revisions to PRSPs, then it should
certainly be in conjunction with other sectors. It would be ineffective to upgrade the
livestock analysis and leave forestry and fisheries untouched. Obviously it can be most
effective where only an I-PRSP has been published since there is more room for
alteration and correction. Nonetheless, PRSPs are supposed to be ‘living’ documents
and there is surely a case for well-argued changes to be inserted in the text of any
posted document.
3
1. INTRODUCTION
The World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF) originally endorsed the
preparation and implementation of Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSPs) by
borrower countries seeking to benefit from the enhanced HIPC (Highly Indebted Poor
Countries) Initiat ive:
“[This] enhanced framework for poverty reduction […] seeks to ensure a ‘robust
link’ between debt relief and poverty reduction by making HIPC debt relief an
integral part of broader efforts to implement outcome-oriented poverty
reduction strategies using all available resources”
(World Bank website, 22 September 1999).
The PRSP model, although originally conceived in the context of the HIPC debt relief
initiative, is now the centrepiece for policy dialogue in all countries receiving
concessional lending flows from the World Bank and IMF. The IMF’s facility for poor
count r ies (former ly k nown as the Enhanced Struct ur al Adjustment Facility) has been
renamed the Poverty Reduction and Growth Facility. The PRSP has replaced the
‘Policy Framework Paper’ as the overarching document. This outlines the policy
directions and resource allocation frameworks for IMF and Bank lending in countries
eligible for concessional assistance. It comes in two parts: the paper itself, drafted
and owned by Government, to their own preferred format; and the Bank/Fund
assess ment of it, which accompanies the paper when it is pr es ented to t he Boar ds of
the Int er nat ional Financ ing Institut ions (IFIs). Governments ar e expected to pr epar e
the PRSP through a process which consults widely, in order to reinforce ownership
within and beyond the Government. The process covers a three-year time-frame, but
with annual review and update. It should also be clear that the process is linked to
indebtedness; many small, developing countries, especially in the Pacific are not
included simply because they are not highly indebted. Countries with chronic political
instability, such as Somalia or Liberia, are similarly excluded.
The PRSP was conceived as a more effective means for donors to interact with
recipient countries in order to stimulate effective poverty reduction. Though it is an
initiat ive of the IFIs, the objective is to encourage a proc ess by which Gover nment
takes charge of its poverty reduction strategy, attempting to prioritise the most
effective policy interventions and make the best use of all resources (domestic and
external) in pursuit of the objective of poverty reduction. In order to fulfil these
aspirations, the PRSP process would need to provide real progress in overcoming some
of the major constraints to achieving sustained poverty reduction in poor countries,
including problems in the donor relationship.
The financial benefits to any country that completes the PRSP process are
considerable and, as a consequence, a large number of indebted countries have
already prepared an interim PRSP (I-PRSP). The requirement that the national
government consult widely has been something of a blockage in many countries and it
is clear t hat this pr ocess has had widely variable effectiveness. Numer ous cons ultants
have written papers questioning the ‘ownership’ of PRSPs and clearly a valuable sub-
industry has been generated. PRSPs tend to be written to a formula and therefore
resemble one another. Some questions therefore emerge:
Are the documents based on a realistic and comprehensive understanding of the
economy of the nation-state in question?
1. Introduction
4
Do t hey corr ect ly identify the local and s pecific causes of poverty?
If so, do the strategies proposed address these specific issues as well as broad
structural elements?
In the light of this, it is therefore useful to ask how accurately the PRSPs reflect
sectoral interests. Evidence from both the documents and from discussions with
participants in the PRSP process show that overall leadership of the PRSP process is
taken by ministries of finance. The documents themselves are intended to be
prepar ed by a participatory pr ocess , inv olv ing st ak eholder works hops and
constellations of satellite committees. However, the drafts are all too often prepared
by a few individuals and then amended in the light of the comments received. But
there is no very st ructured process to ensure that spec ific sectors are repr esented.
Indeed the absence of a representative of a particular sector, through chance or
purposeful omission, may lead to that sector being significantly underplayed in the
final document.
The other side to this, however, is that there is no pressure coming from either
external donors or the lending agencies to ensure that natural resources issues are
dealt with realistically. Broadly speaking, funding for all types of natural resource
projects declined significantly in the 1990s and there is no sign of a reversal of the
trend. The so-called ‘Washington consensus’ focuses on growth-led development,
urban issues and economic remedies, a world-view very much reflected in the PRSPs.
Nevertheless, livestock remain important and will probably grow further in
importance in their role of supplying protein to the megacities of the future.
But this can sometimes act to obscure the place of livestock in poor households.
Approximately one-quarter of the global poor, of whom 2.8 billion live on less than
US$2 per day, are livestock keepers. More specifically, of the 407 million persons who
are classified as farmers in rain-fed zones, 135 million are pastoralists, and a further
156 million keep livestock in landless systems (LID 1999). In many developing
countries, livestock are one of the few means available to the poor for generating
capital assets. Livestock products are also an important nutritional resource, and
through gift-giving animals may act as a means of gaining social approbation and
acceptance. One study in Kenya demonstrated that poor households are almost always
involved in a wide array of livelihood activities, and that the poorer the household,
the greater the economic and social importance of livestock. (Heffernan and
Mist urelli, 2000). There is thus every argument for ensur ing t hat livestock is
effectively represented in PRSP documents.
5
2. GENERAL ANALYSIS OF PRSPS - METHODOLOGY
The complete list of countries in principle entering into the PRSP process was taken
from the World Bank website. This listed 61 countries in December 2002. The
documents themselves were downloaded from the IMF website. Only PRSPs and I-
PRSPs were considered; preliminary reports or drafts were not analysed as these are
as yet incomplete. Some countries that at the time of this study had prepared I-PRSPs
may have since produced full PRSPs.
The coverage of livestock was then ranked as follows:
0 Not mentioned (10 countries)
1 Mentioned (17 countries)
2 Discussed briefly (1 to 2 paragraphs) (11 countries)
3 Discussed more fully and strategy outlined with some budgeting (7 countries)
4 Discussed in detail, systematic strategy, appropriate budgeting (4 countries)
5 Detailed strategy, budget, and poverty reduction impact (0 countries)
Table 1 shows all the countries listed, the ranking assigned to them and a summary of
references to livestock in the text.
Table 1: PRSPs - status and significance of livestock within them
Country D J R Content of livestock references
1. Angola -
2. Albania P + 3 Strategic importance of livestock recognised and target for
increased production set. Need to consolidate production in large
farms and develop more intensive production methods. Broad level
budgeting for the sector included in action p lans.
3. Ar menia I + 1 Mentioned once in t he Appendix 1: Policy Matrix Table.
4. Azerbaijan I + 1 Passing reference to animal husbandr y in the document and
attachment on policy measures.
5. Bangladesh -
6. Benin I 0 No mention
7. Bolivia P + 2 Livestock mentioned in four paragraphs although only br iefly
discusses the need to invest more in the sector. The importance of
diversifying out of the sector for households is also mentioned.
8. Bosnia and
Her zegovina I 3 A livestock action p lan is outlined and the strategic importance of
the livestock sector is discussed in some detail. Targets for
production, marketing and sector development are highlighted and
budgeted as priority programmes.
9. Burkina Faso P 3 A livestock action plan is outlined and the strategic importance of
the livestock sector is discussed in some detail. Targets for
production, marketing and sector development are highlighted and
budgeted as priority programmes.
10. Burundi -
2. General analysis of PRSPs - Methodology
6
Country D J R Content of livestock references
11. Cambodia I + 2 Livestock is discussed briefly as part of the Strategic Framework for
agr icultural pr oduction. The impor tance of livestock f or economic
growth is also r ecognised and priority areas such as the development
of backyard production, feed processing and large animal production
ar e hi ghlig hted. The pote ntia l of livest ock d eve lop ment to a lleviate
rural poverty is recognised.
12. Cameroon I 1 Mentioned briefly.
13. Cape Verde I + 1 Mentioned once.
14. CAR I 1 M entioned once.
15. Chad I 1 Mentioned in main text and policy matrix.
16. Comoros -
17. Congo -
18. Cote d’Ivoire I + 2 Livestock is often referred to in general terms, included in many
‘wish list’ type statements. Participatory processes included
workshops at various places around the country and the impor tance
of developing the livestock sector locally is fr equent ly raised.
19. Djibouti I + 2 Importance of livestock recognised and discussed briefly. Potential
for economic development of the livestock exports is highlighted.
20. Dem.
Republic
Congo
I + 1 Livestock briefly mentioned in the gener al context of agr iculture.
21. East Timor -
22. Eritrea -
23. Ethiopia I + 3 Livestock is discussed at some length mainly with reference to the
livestock strategy 1999-2004.
24. Gambia P + 1 Importance of agriculture (including livestock) stressed but livestock
issues not specifically addressed.
25. Georgia I + 0 No mention
26. Ghana I 2 Livestock is discussed but no consistent policy.
27. Guinea P + 4 Importance of rur al sector for economic growth recognised.
Livestock identified as a priority sub-sector. Priority objectives and
actions out lined and budgeted with tar gets/indicator s.
28. Guinea-Bissau I 0 No mention
29. Guyana P 0 No mention
30. Honduras P + 1 Impor tance of agricultur e & livestock pr oduction noted but no
specific mention of strategy regarding livestock.
31. Indonesia -
32. Kenya I + 1 Single par agr aph r eferr ing to livestock pr oduction in semi-ar id
areas, envisages improved meat processing and animal health. No
recognition of the important role played by pastoralism in Kenyan
economy.
33. Kyrgyz I 1 Paragraph 61 refers to improved wool certification and support to
sheep breeders’ associations. p. 57 passing reference to
privatisation of state farms.
2. General analysis of PRSPs - Methodology
7
Country D J R Content of livestock references
34. Lao PDR I + 3 Livestock referred to throughout report and defined as ‘primary
indicator of wealth’. Livestock disease, improved livestock
production and training of livestock extension offices a ll consider ed
high priority. Livestock seen as profitable replacement for opium
production. But no concrete strategy.
35. Lesotho I + 1 Livestock only referred to in passing comments, as a block to boys
attending school and the need for improved production. No strategy
or analysis.
36. Macedonia I 0 No mention
37. Madagascar I 1 Two passing references, to pasture degradation and the necessity to
combat liv estock theft. This in a countr y wher e catt le out number
people.
38. Malawi P + 2 Livestock considered important to subsistence (p. 44). Livestock
considered important for the food security of the poor (p. 88) and
animal production programmes to be encour aged. Livestock allotted
significant role in Action Plan (Annex 1 p.135). Increased access to
animal health and animal traction assigned priority.
39. Mali I 1 Livestock is mentioned in passing.
40. Mauritania P + 4 Livestock is discussed in some detail. The importance of livestock
for poverty reduction is highlighted and a broad strategy with
priority actions is outlined. Livestock featur es in the budgeted
priority programme tables and macroeconomic fr amework. Targets
for the livestock s ector are also clearly outlined.
41. Moldova I 0 No mention
42. Mongolia I + 2 Livestock is widely mentioned and discussed in the context of the
current problems. Only briefly mentions strategic approaches to the
management of the sector and poverty reduction impact.
43. Mozambique P + 4 Role and importance of livestock for poverty reduction recognised
and understood. Str ategy includes detai led livestock r elated
components, priority actions, targets and indicators but no
budgetary breakdown.
44. Nepal -
45. Nicaragua P + 2 Importance of livest ock noted. Policy actions in s uppor t of broad-
based economic gr owth include r efer ence to livestock.
46. Niger P + 2 Although livestock is mentioned and its strategic importance is
alluded to no overall strategy is outlined
47. Pakistan I + 2 Livestock referred to as the principal safety-net in arid areas and
the loss of stock in droughts as a major factor in food security.
Impr oved livestock production would alleviat e poverty (p. 12). No
reference to any action or strategy to respond to this perception.
48. Rwanda P + 4 Agriculture and livestock considered the ‘engine of gr owth’. Massive
losses of livest ock following the 199 4 genocide. Livestock, via
manure, essential to soil fertility with no access to fertiliser.
Intensifying livestock is a high priority programme action. Strategies
to improve livestock production are given in paragr aph 127. Support
to be given to milk marketing and credit to producers. Livestock
head tax to be abolished.
2. General analysis of PRSPs - Methodology
8
Country D J R Content of livestock references
49. Sao Tome &
Pr incipe I 0 No mention
50. Senegal I 0 No significant menti on
51. Sierra Leone I 0 No significant menti on
52. Sri Lanka - +
53. Tajikistan I 0 No mention
54. Tanzania P 1 Livestock conc eptualised entirely in terms of milk production.
Livestock seen as important in alleviating rural poverty but no
mention of str ategy.
55. Togo -
56. Uganda P + 1 Restocking seen as crucial to increasing rural assets of the poor. No
other significant mentions and no strategy for implementation.
57. Uzbekistan -
58. Vietnam P + 2 Impor tance of livestock noted and key iss ues identified.
59. Yemen P + 3 Role and importance of livestock identified. Livestock components
included in agricultural sector budgeting.
60. Yugoslavia I + 1 Farm r estocking is a stated aim of government policy in Montenegr o
but no details as to how this is to be achieved.
61 Zambia P + 3 Livestock highlighted as a priority area of Agricultural Sector
Investment Programmes. Budget includes livestock support services,
research and development and targets/indicators.
D = Country document: P = PRSP ; I = Interim – PRSP; J = Joint Staff Assessment::
+ = document found; R = ranking
Angola, Bangladesh, Burundi, Congo, Comoros, East Timor, Eritrea, Indonesia, Sri
Lanka, Togo, and Uzbekistan have no documentation. Yugoslavia does not appear on
the World Bank listing but an I-PRSP is found on the IMF Website.
9
3. GENERAL ANALYSIS OF PRSPS - RESULTS
3.1 Participation in the PRSP Process
The total number of countries in theory eligible for HIPC status is 61 However, of
these, 12 do not seem to have entered the PRSP process. The documents submitted by
those 49 countries who have are highly variable in length and quality, varying between
twenty and several hundred pages. Relatively few seem to have been written in the
language of the country in question and then translated, which suggests strongly that
external consultants have been heavily involved in the process. PRSPs are very strong
on the rhetoric of participation and country ownership but sub-national priorities are
reflected in relatively few cases. The broad sectoral priorities outlined in the majority
of the PRSPs appear largely inadequate in their analyses of the specific socio-
economic situation in the country in quest ion.
Figure 1 shows the different stages of the PRSP process, contrasting those countries
with a completed PRSP and those with an interim document. It should be emphasised
that the situation is very dynamic, with new documents being regularly posted on the
IMF website.
Figure 1: Status of the PRSP process in December 2002
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
No document I-PRSP PRSP
Document Status
Percentage
n = 61
3. General Analysis of PRSPs - Results
1
0
3.2 The Contribution of Agriculture to GDP and Employment
Generally speaking, livestock production is increasing worldwide, as shown in Table 2.
The exceptions ar e Central As ian countr ies suc h as Ar menia, Azer baijan, Geor gia,
Kyrgyz, Moldova etc. and some African countries, notably Burundi, Djibouti, Lesotho
and Madagascar. Almost certainly the reason for the substantial declines in almost all
Central Asian countries is decollectivisation. The reversion to more traditional open
range systems has been accompanied by de-intensification as well as a related
deterioration of statistical systems which makes the figures more difficult to
interpret. Civil disorder explains Burundi, but it is hard to explain other countries,
such as Angola , where a civil war has appar ently s imult aneo us ly led t o v ery s ignifica nt
increases in livestock production. It would interesting to know if declines in Lesotho
and Madagascar are related t o the overgrazing of grassy uplands. Similar phenomena
are becoming very apparent in Nigeria. Table 2 shows the GDP of PRSP countries and
the percentage of GDP drawn from agr icultur e and livestock, a percentage whic h is
slowly decreasing. The countries identified for case studies are shown in bold.
Table 2: Human population, contribution of agriculture and livestock to GDP and
employment and rating of livestock in PRSP (2000)
Country Human
Population
('000)
% Pop.1 in
Agriculture % GDP
Agriculture % GDP
Livestock Livestock
Production
Index*2
Livestock
PRSP
rating
Albania 3,134 48 51 32 - 3
Angola 13,134 72 6 3 136 -
Armenia 3,787 13 25 13 65 1
Azerbaijan 8,041 27 19 9 77 1
Bangladesh 137,439 56 25 4 136 -
Benin 6,272 54 38 4 124 0
Bolivia 8,329 44 22 10 135 2
Bosnia Herzegovina 3,977 5 12 5 - 3
Burkina Faso 11,535 92 35 12 136 3
Burundi 6,356 90 51 4 76 -
Cambodia 13,104 70 37 10 150 2
Cameroon 14,876 59 44 11 120 1
Cape Ver de 427 23 12 8 175 1
CAR 3,717 73 55 24 134 1
Chad 7,885 75 39 15 114 1
Comoros 706 74 41 6 105 -
Congo 3,018 41 5 1 131 -
1 Economically active population
2 1889-91 = 100
3. General Analysis of PRSPs - Results
11
Country Human
Population
('000)
% Pop.3 in
Agriculture % GDP
Agriculture % GDP
Livestock Livestock
Production
Index*4
Livestock
PRSP
rating
Cote d’Ivoir e 16,013 49 29 2 128 2
Djibouti 632 79 4 3 85 2
DRC 50,948 63 - - 102 1
East Timor 737 82 - - 108 -
Eritrea 3,659 78 - - 108 -
Ethiopia 62,908 82 52 18 117 3
Gambia 1,303 79 38 5 117 1
Georgia 5,262 20 32 17 84 0
Ghana 19,306 57 35 3 102 2
Guinea 8,154 84 24 3 140 4
Guinea-Bissau 1,199 83 59 14 121 0
Guyana 761 18 - - 188 0
Honduras 6,417 32 18 8 135 1
Indonesia 212,092 48 17 2 126 -
Kenya 30,669 75 20 11 107 1
Kazakhstan 4,921 26 39 22 81 1
Lao PDR 5,279 76 53 10 155 3
Lesotho 2,035 38 17 8 89 1
Macedonia 2,034 13 12 3 85 0
Madagascar 15,970 74 35 14 99 1
Malawi 11,308 83 42 4 113 2
Mali 11,351 81 46 21 123 1
Mauritania 2,665 53 22 19 100 4
Moldova 4,295 23 28 9 35 0
Mongolia 2,533 24 33 32 88 2
Mozambique 18,292 81 24 5 104 4
Nepal 23,043 93 40 11 124 -
Nicar agua 5,071 20 32 14 117 2
Niger 10,832 88 39 15 121 2
Pakistan 141,256 47 26 12 152 2
Rwanda 7,609 90 44 5 112 4
Senegal 9,421 74 18 6 138 0
Sierra Leone 4,405 62 47 10 109 0
Sri Lanka 18,924 46 20 3 134 -
3 Economically active population
4 1889-91 = 100
3. General Analysis of PRSPs - Results
1
2
Country Human
Population
('000)
% Pop.5 in
Agriculture % GDP
Agriculture % GDP
Livestock Livestock
Production
Index*6
Livestock
PRSP
rating
Sao Tome and Pr incipe 138 64 20 2 152 0
Tajikistan 6,087 34 19 6 39 0
Tanzania 35,119 80 45 15 119 1
Togo 4,527 60 38 5 129 -
Uganda 23,300 80 42 8 120 1
Uzbekistan 24,881 28 35 15 119 -
Vietnam 78,137 67 24 5 165 2
Yemen 18,349 51 15 7 139 3
Yugoslavia 10,552 20 - - 102 1
Zambia 10,421 69 27 11 118 3
Source: FAOSTAT (2002);
World Bank (2002) World Development Indicators on CD-ROM
3.3 Livestock in the PRSPs
It is important to emphasise that many of the poorer countries depend on livestock to
a considerable extent, an extent that is hardly reflected in the PRSP documents. It is
clear that agriculture is not a very good proxy for livestock; a country such as Niger
wit h limited agr icult ure will ha v e a muc h gr eater pr opor t ion of agr iculture coming
from livestock than, for example, Laos. There is absolutely no connection between
the importance of livestock for a given economy and the significance attributed to it
in the PRSP. Pastoral countries, where livestock is the mainstay of the subsistence of
the majority of the population, such as Niger or Tajikistan, only refer to livestock in
passing. Some countries, such as Macedonia, completely ignore it. Although the table
assigns a potential grading 0-5 in assessing the role of livestock in PRSPs in fact no
single country att ains gr ade 5, which is full cons ideration of t he role of livestock and
adequate strategies for addressing its significance for poverty alleviation. The
countries that come closest to meeting this target are probably Mozambique and
Mauritania, which refer to the importance of livestock throughout and in particular
seem to grasp its role in securing livelihoods.
5 Economically active population
6 1889-91 = 100
3. General Analysis of PRSPs - Results
1
3
Figure 2 shows the rankings assigned in Table 1 to the individual countries with existing
documents.
3. General Analysis of PRSPs - Results
14
Figure 2: Significance attributed to livestock in PRSPs
It is clear this is an unsatisfactory and unrealistic result that ignores the importance of
livest oc k in t he lives of mi llions of poor people, a nd the pot ential t hat liv est ock has
for reducing poverty.
3.4 The Joint Staff Assessments
The Joint Staff Assessment (JSA) is the ongoing review process conducted by the World
Bank and the IMF of the PRSPs. The JSAs are posted on the Web, and their existence is
noted in Table 1. However, in no case are there more than passing references to
livestock and certainly no pressure to consider livestock issues in greater depth.
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
012345
Grade
Percentage
n = 61
15
4. DETAILED COUNTRY CASE STUDIES
4.1 Niger
4.1.1 Background
Econo mic situ ation: Niger, a former French colony, gained independence in 1960. Its
surface area is 1,267,000 km2 but only 125, 200 km2 is considered arable. Niger,
landlocked and situated on the southern edge of the Sahara is one of the poorest
countries in the world. The economy is based largely on subsistence crops, livestock,
and some of the world's largest uranium deposits. Drought cycles, desertification, a
3.4% population growth rate and the drop in world demand for uranium have undercut
an already marginal economy. The persistent uranium price slump has brought lower
revenues for Niger's uranium sector, although uranium still provides 72% of national
export proceeds. Traditional subsistence farming, herding, small trading, and informal
markets dominate an economy that generates few formal sector jobs.
Table 3: Niger country data (1990/2000 comparison)
1990 2000
Human Population 7,731,000 10,832,000
Crude birth rate (per 1,000) 55.5 50.6
PPP GDP/capita 738.0 746.0
Human Development Index1 - 0.277
FDI % of GDP 0 0.8
Aid % of Govt. Expenditure - -
Sources:1UNDP World Development Repor t (2002)
World Bank (2002) World Development Indicators on CD-ROM
The country is usually divided into four ecolog ical zones; the Sahara, the arid central
region, the Sahel (with a rainfall of 200-500 mm.) and the Sudanian (with a rainfall of
600-800 mm.). Niger's agricultural and livestock sectors are the mainstay of all but 18
percent of the population. Fifteen percent of Niger's GDP is generated by livestock
production (camels, goats, sheep and cattle), supporting 29 percent of the population.
The 15 percent of Niger's land that is arable is found mainly along its southern border
with Nigeria. Rainfall varies and when insufficient, Niger has difficulty feeding its
population and must rely on grain purchases and food aid to meet food requirements.
Of Niger's exports, foreign exchange earnings from livestock, although impossible to
quantify, are second only to those from uranium. Actual exports far exceed official
statistics, which can omit large herds of animals informally crossing into Nigeria. Some
hides and skins are exported and some are transformed into handicrafts. The January
1994 CFA franc devaluation contributed to an annual average economic growth of 3.5
percent throughout the mid-1990s. The economy stagnated due to a sharp reduction
in foreign aid in 1999, which gradually resumed in 2000. Reflecting the importance of
the agricultural sector, the return of good rains in 2001 was the primary factor
underlying a projected growth of 4.5 percent for 2001.
In recent years, the Government of Niger promulgated revisions to the investment
code (1997 and 2000), petroleum code (1992), and mining code (1993), all with
attractive terms for investors. The present government actively seeks foreign private
investment and considers it key to restoring economic growth and development. With
4. Detailed country case studies
1
6
the assistance of the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), it has undertaken
a concerted effort to revitalise the private sector.
In January 2000, Niger's newly elected government inherited serious financial and
ec ono mic problems inc luding a v irtually empty treas ury , pa st-due sa lar ies and
scholarship payments, increased debt, reduced revenue performance, and lower
public investment. In December 2000, Niger qualified for enhanced debt relief under
the I nternat iona l Monetary Fund programme for Highly Indebted Poor Countr ies a nd
concluded an agreement with the Fund on a Poverty Reduction and Growth Facility
(PRGF). In addition to strengthening the budgetar y proc ess and public financ es, the
new government has pursued economic reform with the privatisation of water
distribution and telecommunications and the implementation of a flexible petroleum
produc t pricing struct ure tied to world ma rket pr ic es . Furt her pr ivatisat ions of public
enterprises are in progress. In its effort to consolidate macroeconomic stability under
the PRGF, the government is also taking action to reduce corruption and, as the result
of a participatory process encompassing civil society, has devised a Poverty Reduction
Strategy Plan that focuses on improving health, primary education, rural
infrastructure, and judicial reform.
The household consumption survey conducted in 1990 and 1993 under the PADEM1
shows that of the 8,299,600 residents of the country at that time, 5,269,300 people
(two-thirds) are living below the poverty line and 2,824,800, or one-third are below
the extreme poverty threshold. Poverty is more severe in rural areas than in the
cities. No survey of this kind has been conducted since 1993, but it would appear that
the situation has deteriorated sharply since then. Data on mother and child health
show the extent of extreme poverty in which the people of Niger are living. Successive
Human Development Reports (NHDR) have measured poverty in terms of the Human
Poverty Index (HPI)3. For Niger that index stood at 64.3 percent in 1997, 66.7 percent
in 1998 and 62.2 percent in 1999.
The most important donors in Niger are France, the European Union, the World Bank,
the IMF and other United Nations agencies (UNDP, UNICEF, FAO, WFP, and UNFPA).
Other principal donors include the United States, Belgium, Germany, Switzerland,
Canada, and Saudi Arabia. While USAID does not have an office in Niger, the United
States is a major donor, contributing nearly $10 million each year to Niger’s
development. The U.S. is also a major partner in policy coordination in such areas as
food security and HIV/AIDS. The importance of external support for Niger's
development is demonstrated by the fact that about 45 percent of the government's
2002 budget, including 80 percent of its capital budget, derives from donor resources.
Agriculture: Two-thirds of Niger is desert and agriculture is concentrated in the
Sudanian region where irrigated production is possible. Even so, irrigated production
covers less than 5 percent of the total cultivated area. The principal crops are
sorghum, millet, cowpea and some rice, maize and cassava. Cotton and groundnuts
are significant cash crops, although production has declined markedly since the 1970s.
Cowpeas and onions are grown for commercial export, as are small quantities of
garlic, peppers, potatoes, and wheat. Niger is highly dependent on rainfall, which
varies considerably year on year and it is frequently both forced to import cereal
staples and to request food aid. Although the rains in 2000 were poor, those in 2001
were plentiful and well distributed. Millet, sorghum, and cassava are Niger's principal
rainfed subsistence crops. Since the devaluation of the CFA franc, locally produced
irrigated rice, though expensive, has been cheaper than imported rice. This has
encouraged product ion.
4. Detailed country case studies
17
Table 4: Niger agricultural data (1990/2000 comparison)
1990 2000
Agr icultural Population 6,921,000 9,505,000
Agr ic. population as % of total population 89.8 87.7
Ha arable land/100 people in agriculture 51.9 47.2
LUs/100 people in agriculture 26.7 25.9
Agr iculture value added per worker (constant 1995)1 191 206
Livestock value added per worker (constant 1995)2 73 78
Sources: FAOSTAT (2002)
1
World Bank (2002) W or ld Development Indicator s on CD-ROM; data for 1999
2 Estimated by authors based on FAOSTAT (2002) and World Bank (2002)
There is little mechanisation in Niger apart from on some of the irrigation schemes.
Large areas are required for rainfed cultivation, in order to harvest a crop, and this
means that animal traction is essential in most areas. Cattle are the principal draught
animals, but camels, horses and donkeys are also used.
4.1.2 Livestock
Role of livestock in Niger: Niger is ent irely semi-ar id or arid and muc h of it is
unsuitable for agriculture. Livestock is therefore the only option for most of the
population. The majority of the livestock is held by pastoral nomads, the Tuareg and
the Fulbe, who range across the dry savannahs and cross freely into neighbouring
count r ies. Howev er, t he agricultural populat ions, largely concentr at ed along t he
valley of the Niger, are also heavily dependent on animals for farming, both for
manure and draught power.
Table 5 shows the livestock populations in 2001 according to FAOSTAT. It should be
made clear that these figures are estimates with a large margin for error; it is
impractical to give absolute figures in a country where most livestock owners cross
international borders regularly and indeed may hold identity cards for several
c ount ries.
Table 5: Niger livestock populations
Species 1990 2000 Growth rate (%)
Camels 366,000 410,000 1.1
Cattle 1,711,000 2,216,500 2.6
Sheep and Goats 8,069,000 11,115,900 3.3
Pigs 37,400 39,000 0.4
Poultry 17,800,000 23,500,000 2.8
Equines 514,000 674,000 1.1
Source: FAOSTAT (2002)
Despite being affected by the severe droughts of the 1970s and 1980s, total value of
the national herd is valued at FCFA420 billion. The bulk of the sectors’ revenue comes
from the sale of live cattle in Niger or the sub-region. Exports from Niger to Nigeria
are essentially made up of agricultural and livestock products and they represent
more than 90 percent of total exports. At the same time, livestock production, which
4. Detailed country case studies
1
8
accounted for more than 35 percent of agricultural GDP has been declining at nearly 2
percent a year.
From 1990 to 1999, key exports to Nigeria have averaged the following growth rates in
volume: cattle (3.7 percent); goats and poultry (0.3 percent), camels (12 percent);
raw hide and skin and leather (6.0 percent); cowpeas (-6.3 percent) and onions (-6.0
percent). The determinant factor of cattle exports to Nigeria is the under-populated
Sahelian zone in northern Niger, a comparative advantage over a similar ecological
zone in Nigeria where high population density constrains livestock development.
Livestock in the PRSP: Niger complet ed a full PRSP in Ja nuary 2002. The PRSP
document recognises the importance of livest ock in the economy . Generally speaking,
household surveys show that the principal sources of household income in Niger are
the sale of farm produce and animals, other income generating activities, migrants'
remittances and the sale of livestock by-products (PRSP p. 20).
Livestock are mentioned throughout the document as of major importance in Niger’s
export market and the significance of cross-border sales to Nigeria is several times
underlined. The relianc e o n liv est ock in a z one liable t o clima tic shocks is ment ioned
several times. Actions in support of livestock development come under the heading
Agro-sylvo-pastoral development and food security. These are principally:
developing better procurement systems for equipment and inputs needed in
agriculture, forestry, livestock production and veterinary medicine;
developing food-crops trade by reinforcing rural infrastructure (slaughterhouses,
crop dryers, cattle markets)
These do not really address the vulnerability of livestock producers who are subject to
increasing climatic shocks nor do they explore how enterprises can be diversified to
reduce reliance on s ingle products .
Livestock deve lopment: The Government of Niger published its Framework Paper for
the Rehabilitation of the Livestock Industry in Niger (Document cadre pour la relance
du secteur de l’élevage au Niger) in 2001 as a basis for future livestock policy. This
document calls for improved infrastructure, better veterinary services and so on.
However, the issues for livestock producers in Niger are structural rather than
technical; for example ensuring that herds have enough pasture and water, and reach
markets in saleable condition.
The past oral nomads of Niger depend on the past ure resour ces of many neighbouring
countr ies, notably Niger ia and Chad. Ev ery year , many herds migrate southwards to
take advantage of the extended rains further south. But demographic growth in
Nigeria and the expansion of cultivation along river basins is creating a significant
reduction in pasture resources and access to cattle-watering points is gradually being
reduced. The other consequence is a much elevated incidence of conflict with
farmers. The government of Niger will need to take action in consort with the Nigerian
gov er nment to resolve these issues befor e they escalate further.
Water is a significant const raint for liv estoc k producers throughout the reg ion. The
lowest water supply coverage rates for people and livestock are to be found in the
central zone, namely the farming and herding region. The major problems with this
sub-sector are in the harnessing of water resources and the use of pastureland, poor
distr ibution of waterworks, overgr az ing near major pumping stations, and socio-
economic problems, such as ownership of waterworks and conflicts between herders
and farmers.
4. Detailed country case studies
1
9
4.1.3 Conclusions and recommendations
As the analysis shows clearly, Niger depends heavily on its livestock sector for both
income and food security, both directly through production and sales and through
draught animal power. Falling income from uranium and a failure to develop other
mineral resources implies that Niger will be thrown back on its productive resources in
coming decades. The positive side of this is that the principal market, Nigeria, has a
relentlessly increas ing rural and ur ba n population. This means that demand for meat
will increase and that it will be more and more difficult for Nigeria’s internal livestock
producers to meet that demand, as pressure to convert grazing to cropland increases.
As a consequence a more in-depth analysis is needed to ensure that livestock
producers in Niger benefit as much as possible from this market. For example,
although the PRSP suggests that rural infrastructure such as slaughterhouses and
cattle markets be improved, it is not at all clear that this would increase livestock
exports. Nigerian consumers notoriously like ‘hot meat’ (i.e. recently slaughtered)
which is why ruminant liv estock are dr iven to bor der markets to be sold. They are
then put in large trucks and transported live to the large urban markets of the south.
Similarly, there is an increased demand for agricultural work animals in Nigeria,
notably camels and donkeys, which are hard to breed in more southerly latitudes.
Niger is easily best-placed to supply this demand. The suggestion is therefore that
improved veterinary services, especially in remote areas, are likely to pay the
greatest dividends in terms of improving Niger’s export prospects.
This is only to illustrate that if poverty is to be reduced, vulnerability decreased and
incomes increased then a more detailed analysis of Niger’s single most important
productive activity is required. Writing in the PRSP that livestock infrastructure should
be improved is too vague; only an analysis of future trends based on a realistic
description of the future economic situation of the region will produce a strategy that
is likely to have an impact. The recommendation is therefore to:
provide an up-to-date account of livestock production and marketing in Niger
to integrate this with an analysis of future trends in neighbouring countries
to examine what actions would increase both offtake and the added value of
individual species
to explore strategies for economic diversification to reduce vulnerability to
climat ic shocks
to examine the production of work animals for sale and improve their
characteristics
4.1.4 References
Bonfiglioli, A.M. 1988. Duëal: Histoire de famille de troupeau chez un groupe de
Wodaabe de Niger. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bureau de réalisations Techniques, d'Etudes et de Conseils. 1999. Bilan diagnostic des
actions et per spect iv es dans le doma ines de population, envir onnement et
secteur alimentaire au Niger (Assessment and Diagnostic of activities and
perspectives in the areas of population, environment and the food sector in
Niger). March 1999.
Directorate of Statistics and National Accounts (DSCN): Household Budget and
Expenditure Survey in Niger 1989/1990 - 1992/1993. Poverty Profile. November
1994.
4. Detailed country case studies
20
Gouvernement du Niger, UNDP, World Bank: Rural Sector: Public Expenditure Review
for the period 1991-1998. September 2000;
Hülsebusch, C. & E. Schlecht 2000. The livestock sector of Niger. Stuttgart: Ulrich
Grauer.
Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock 1997: Atlas du secteur agricole au Niger (Niger's
Agriculture Sector Atlas). Niamey.
Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock 1999. Stratégie de croissance agricole durable (A
Sustainable Agriculture Growth Strategy). Niamey.
Oxby, C. 1986. Women and the allocation of herding labour in a pastoral society
(Souther n Kel Ferwan Twareg , Niger). In : Le Fils et L e Neveu. Jeux et enjeux de
la parenté touarégue, Publié sous la direction de S. Bernus, P. Bonte, L. Brock, H.
Claudot, Chapter 5, 99-127. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Swift , J.J. ed. 1984. Past or al development in Centr a l Nig er . F inal Report of the Niger
Range and Livestock Project, Niger. Niamey.
Wilson, R.T., Wagenaar, K. and Louis, S. 1984. Animal production. In: Pastoral
development in central Niger. Final report of the Niger Range and Livestock
project to the Government of the Republic of Niger. J.J. Swift. ed. 69-144.
Niamey: USAID.
World Bank (1994). Niger Poverty Assessment, Working Paper No. 1. « Eléments pour
un profil de pauvreté »(Elements of a Poverty profile). Population and Human
Resources Division, West Central Africa Department, Africa Region. The World
Bank, Washington DC.
World Bank (1996). Niger Poverty Assessment : A Resilient People in a Harsh
Environment. Population and Human Resources Division, West Central Africa
Department, Africa Region. The World Bank, Washington DC.
World Bank (1997). « Country Assistance Strategy of the World Bank Group for the
Republic of Niger », Country Department 13, Africa Region. The World Bank,
Washington DC.
4.1.5 Websites
http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/5474.htm
http://www.uncdf.org/projects/eval/ner87c04.html
4.2 Ethiopia
4.2.1 Background
History: Ethiopia was a highly centralised monarchy until the early 1970s, when the
Emperor was removed and control fell into the hands of the revolutionary Marxist
regime, the Derg. Continuing insurrection in the regions and a decade of warfare in
the 1980s resulted in extreme running down of national resources and infrastructure
as well as isolation from the major donors. The fall of the Derg in 1991 has been
followed by a decade of increasing stability and reform under the Federal Democratic
Republic of Ethiopia. The border war with Eritrea in 1998-9 was marked by a
suspension of aid by some donors. In addition, continuing insecurity in southern Sudan
4. Detailed country case studies
2
1
has had the effect of making Ethiopia’s western borders unsafe for civilian
populations.
Table 6: Ethiopia country data (1990/2000 comparison)
1990 2000
Human Population 51,180,000 64,298,000
Crude birth rate (per 1,000) 50.5 43.8
PPP GDP/capita 486.0 668.0
Human Development Index1 - 0.327
FDI % of GDP 0.2 0.8
Aid % of Govt. Expenditure 43.5 -
Sources: 1UNDP World Development Report (2002)
World Bank (2002) World Development Indicators on CD-ROM
Continuing insecurity has conjoined with a troubling demographic situation to create a
country permanently on the edge of food security crises, with a severely degraded
environment. With a population of more than 67 million projected for 2002 (CSA 1999)
and a land area of 1,127,000 km2, Ethiopia has a very high average population density
(59 inhabit ant s/km2) in relation to most other countries in Sub-Saharan Africa.
Ethiopia is one of the poorest countries in the world (ranked 171 out of 174) (UNDP
2000) reflecting its low per capita income, and a deteriorating food security situation.
Average food supply per day and per capita is between 1,600 and 1,700 calories, only
70 percent of estimated requirements (World Bank 1999).
Ethiopia is a high mountainous plateau surrounded by arid and semi-arid rangelands,
occupied principally by pastoral nomads who range freely across international borders.
Arid and semi-arid pastoral areas make up approximately 60 percent of Ethiopia's land
area. Although rainfall is high in much of the elevated region, sometimes permitting
two cropping seasons a year, overpopulation and occasional failures of the rains have
created a situation where the necessary continuing investment in soil and water
cons ervation measur es has not been undertaken. Henc e even slight variations in
precipitation can have extreme impacts on food security.
Agriculture: Land is the bas ic agr icult ural res ource on which Et hiopian society
presently depends for the production of food, clothing, energy and housing. Out of the
112.3 million hectares total land area, about 56 percent is regarded to be suitable for
cult iv at ion. However , only 14 .8 perc ent of the tot al land is pr es ent ly under cult ivation
for the production of annual and perennial crops.
Although the national economy is primarily agrarian, agriculture as a share of GDP has
fallen from about 65 percent in 1960 to around 50 percent in 1997 (World Bank
2000b). Nevertheless, agriculture accounts for 80 percent of total employment,
implying very low returns to labour. Moreover, increases in agricultural production
have consistently failed to keep pace with population growth. High rates of labour
absorption in agriculture, low growth rates in land productivity and stagnant labour
pr oductivity o nly incr eas e demand for arable land. As la nd r eserves in t he Et hiopian
highlands are extremely scarce, prospects for ecological sustainability and economic
viability of current agricultural practices are poor (UNDP 1997). Besides supplyin