Suchergebnisse

Farmer-led irrigation development, a process in which farmers initiate the establishment of irrigation, is increasingly recognised as the driving force behind irrigation expansion, agricultural intensification, and commercialisation in sub-Saharan Africa. Governments and development agencies aim to build upon these practices to further stimulate agricultural production and expand the irrigated area. In what seems the recognition of farmers' ability to take the lead, various African states have developed policies for 'demand-driven irrigation development'. This article scrutinises the actual practices of such a policy through a case analysis of an intervention in Northern Tanzania. The analysis demonstrates how even demand-driven policies can disturb the development trajectory of farmer-led irrigation development by reinforcing modernisation ideals adhered to by both farmers and government employees. An emphasis on the aesthetics of modernity leads to symbolic modernisation, cementing the dominant role of the state and formal expertise and paralysing farmers' irrigation development initiatives. This does not necessarily lead to agricultural intensification and commercialisation, which the formal policies seem to aim for and which is central to processes of farmer-led irrigation development.

The debate around what kind of irrigation, large- or small-scale, modern or traditional, best contributes to food security and rural development continues to shape irrigation policies and development in the Global South. In Tanzania, the irrigation categories of 'modern' and 'traditional' are dominating irrigation policies and are shaping interventions. In this paper, we explore what these concepts really entail in the Tanzanian context and how they relate to a case of farmer-led groundwater irrigation development in Kahe ward, Kilimanjaro Region. For our analysis, we rely on three months of qualitative fieldwork in 2016, a household questionnaire, secondary data such as policy documents and the results of a mapping exercise in 2014–2015. In the early 2000s, smallholders in Kahe started developing groundwater. This has led to a new, differentiated landscape in which different forms of agricultural production co-exist. The same set of groundwater irrigation technologies has facilitated the emergence of different classes of farmers, ranging from those engaging with subsistence farming to those doing capitalist farming. The level of inputs and integration with markets vary, as does crop choice. As such, some farms emulate the 'modern' ideal of commercial farming promoted by the government, while others do not, or to a lesser extent. We also find that national policy discourses on irrigation are not necessarily repeated at the local level, where interventions are strongly driven by prioritization based on conflict and funding. We conclude that the policy concepts of traditional and modern irrigation do not do justice to the complexity of actual irrigation development in the Kahe case, and obfuscate its contribution to rural development and food security. We argue that a single irrigation technology does not lead to a single agricultural mode of production, and that irrigation policies and interventions should take into account the differentiation among irrigators.

In both Mozambique and Tanzania, farmer-led development of irrigation is widespread, yet it is little recognised in irrigation policies and is under-supported by the government. This paper explores how this situation is exacerbated by modernisation ideas in irrigation policy and professional thinking. By means of a historical review, we trace modernisation thinking in irrigation development from the colonial period onwards, and analyse how this thinking continues to play out in contemporary irrigation policies in both countries. We then examine the relationship between modernisation thinking and practices of farmer-led irrigation development, drawing on policy documents, field studies, and interviews in both countries. Based on this analysis, we argue that the nature of farmer-led development of irrigation is consistent with many of the goals identified by state agricultural modernisation programmes, but not with the means by which government and state policies envisage their achievement. As a consequence, policies and state officials tend to screen out farmers' irrigation initiatives as not relevant to development until they are brought within state-sanctioned processes of technical design and administration. © 2019, Water Alternatives Association.

In both Mozambique and Tanzania, farmer-led development of irrigation is widespread, yet it is little recognised in irrigation policies and is under-supported by the government. This paper explores how this situation is exacerbated by modernisation ideas in irrigation policy and professional thinking. By means of a historical review, we trace modernisation thinking in irrigation development from the colonial period onwards, and analyse how this thinking continues to play out in contemporary irrigation policies in both countries. We then examine the relationship between modernisation thinking and practices of farmer-led irrigation development, drawing on policy documents, field studies, and interviews in both countries. Based on this analysis, we argue that the nature of farmer-led development of irrigation is consistent with many of the goals identified by state agricultural modernisation programmes, but not with the means by which government and state policies envisage their achievement. As a consequence, policies and state officials tend to screen out farmers' irrigation initiatives as not relevant to development until they are brought within state-sanctioned processes of technical design and administration.

Low crop productivity, food insecurity, hunger and malnutrition; inadequate farming knowledge and skills, implements and inputs are characteristic of smallholder agriculture in Southern Africa. Many researchers argue that conservation agriculture can guarantee higher crop productivity, food security, improved livelihoods and environmental protection, better than the unsustainable traditional systems of slash and burn practices. In this paper, we present the results of a meta-analysis of over 40 academic publications to review conservation agriculture's role in influencing desired livelihood outcomes in Southern Africa. We conclude that the effectiveness of conservation agriculture towards better livelihood outcomes in Southern Africa remains debatable, especially when supportive government policies are lacking.