AN ASSESSMENT OF AGRICULTURAL PROGRAMMES AND FOOD INSECURITY IN NIGERIA FROM 1960 TO 2016.
BY
YUSUF, IZANG ELIJAH Department of History and International Studies, Faculty of Arts, University of Jos, P.M.B 2084, Jos, Plateau State-Nigeria. elijahyusuf29@yahoo.com: elijahyusuf93@gmail.com
Tel: +234-8037310377; +234-7013855866
ABSTRACT: Agricultural programmes are introduced by government to bring food security and to solve the problem of food insecurity. The governments of Nigeria introduced different agricultural programmes from 1960 to 2016 in order to provide adequate, nutritional and healthy food for all Nigerians. Agriculture is very fundamental to the sustenance of every society and serves as the back bone to economic development, in the provision of food for human development and raw materials for industry. Sustainable agricultural development in any country is propelled by agricultural programmes. It is in this light that this paper sets out to examine the different agricultural programmes in Nigeria from 1960 to 2016 and to examine if these programmes have led to the realization of food security in the country or not. The paper traced chronologically the various agricultural programmes by year, regimes/administration, aim/objectives and failures. The research’s reliance is on secondary source materials interpreted using historical narrative to analyze agricultural programmes and food security in Nigeria. The paper’s submission is aligned to address the findings of the interrogation of agricultural programmes in Nigeria.
1
Keywords: Agriculture, Policy, Programme and Food Security INTRODUCTION Agriculture is the foundation of African economic development. In Nigeria, the agricultural sector that provides food has suffered so many challenges and worse reforms. 1 Among the major challenges are climate change, drought, land degradation, violent conflicts, and government policies towards agriculture etc.2 In realization of this, the Federal Government of Nigeria (FGN) has embarked on various policies and programmes aimed at strengthening the agricultural sector in order to continue to perform its role of combating poverty. Although agriculture had remained the mainstay of the Nigerian economy until the 1970s when oil exploration and exploitation started in commercial quantity, there has been declining contributions of agriculture to the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in the past three decades. This could be associated with the gross neglect of
the
agricultural
sector
occasioned
by
dependence on the oil sector. Some of the policies and programmes embarked by the Federal Government of Nigeria (FGN) to revamp the agricultural sector in recent times include; Farm Settlement Scheme, National Accelerated Food Production (NAFP), Agricultural Development Projects (ADPs), River Basin Development Authorities (RBDAs), National Seed Service (NSS), Operation Feed the Nation (OFN), Green Revolution Programme, Directorate of Foods, Roads and Rural Infrastructure (DFFRI), Root and Tuber Expansion Programme
(RTEP) Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy (NEEDS) etc, to
encourage private sector participation in the development of the economy. 3 It was also aimed 1 M. I. Daneji, ‘Agricultural Development Intervention Programmes in Nigeria (1960 To Date): A Review’ In Savannah Journal of Agriulture, Volume 6(1); June, 2011, nairametrics.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/SJA_101_107.pdf . 101. (accessed 23 March, 2017) 2 Ehigiamusoe, Uyi Kizito, “A Comparative Analysis of Agricultural Performance between the Military and Civilian Regimes in Nigeria” in International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Invention, Volume 1 Issue 1 December. 2012 PP.13-23 3 T. Agber, P.I Iortima, And E.N Imbur, ‘Lessons from Implementation of Nigeria’s Past National Agricultural Programs for the Transformation Agenda’ in American Journal Of Research Communication. www.usa-
2
at promoting growth and poverty reduction through a participatory process involving civil society and development partners. Conscious of the strategic importance of agriculture in the economy, successive Governments in the country formulated and implemented programmes aimed at boosting agricultural production. All the agricultural programmes have well defined aim and objectives to improve food security, such as the provision of subsidies for farmers in the form of fertilizer, tractors, insecticide, seedlings, farming equipments loans through Agricultural Banks and the assistance of World Bank, and other foreign agencies etc. With all forms of assistance, the question that beseech for answer is; weather the country has achieved the status of a food secured nation? It is important to note that after independence, Nigerian elites inherited the colonial agricultural structure that gave more preference to the production of cash crops over food crops. This enabled Nigeria received her highest revenue from the agricultural sector. With the oil boom of the 1970s, the country neglected agriculture and relied on the oil sector, and most farmers in the rural sector also migrated to the urban centres in search of petro-dollar, abandoning the rural areas. Since then, Nigeria has been battling with one form of agricultural programme or the other in order to tackle the question of food insecurity in the country. Food insecurity has resulted in hunger, malnutrition, and kwashiorkor among individuals and at the household levels. Food insecurity has forced people to engage in social vices such as stealing, armed robbery, prostitution, child labour, ethnic and religious crisis, which threatened the survival of Nigeria.4 The paper is therefore divided as follows (i) Introduction (ii) Conceptual Understanding of Food Insecurity (iii) Understanding Agricultural Policy and Programme in
journals.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Agber1_Vol110.pdf. 3/23/2017. 239. (accessed 23 March, 2017) 4 Z. D Goshit, ‘Food Security and the Entrenchment of Durable Democracy in Nigeria’ in Michael O. Maduagwu and Abubakar Sokoto Mohammad (ed), Fulbright Alumni (Nigeria) Book of Reading, No. 2: Challenges and Prospects of Democratization in Nigeria, Nsukka Multi-Education Service Trust, 2004, 181.
3
Nigeria (iv) History of Agricultural Programmes in Nigeria (v) Appraisal of Agricultural Programmes and Food Security (v) Conclusion CONCEPTUAL UNDERSTANDING OF AGRICULTURE AND FOOD INSECURITY To analyze the role of agriculture in an economy, the definition of agriculture is important. The word ‘agriculture’ has been derived from two Latin words ‘ager’ means land or field and ‘cultura’ means cultivation. So, literally agriculture means the production of crops for economic purpose by cultivating soil. Agriculture may also be defined as the biological exploitation of soil for the purpose of production. But in broad sense, agriculture is the branch of applied science, which deals with production, improvement, protection, processing, marketing, extension etc. of crops by proper utilization of natural resources. The natural resources are soil, sunlight, air, water, temperature etc5. Agriculture is defined in the Agriculture Act 1947, as including ‘horticulture, fruit growing, seed growing, dairy farming and livestock breeding and keeping, the use of land as grazing land, meadow land, osier land, market gardens and nursery grounds, and the use of land for woodlands where that use ancillary to the farming of land for Agricultural purposes”. It is also defined as ‘purposeful work through which elements in nature are harnessed to produce plants and animals to meet the human needs. It is a biological production process, which depends on the growth and development of selected plants and animals within the local environment.6 Here, from the definitions of agriculture, one cannot help but notice the important use of land as a source to food production. Agriculture meets the basic necessity of man by providing food, shelter and clothing and the ground for human survival. The Food and Agricultural Organization defines food insecurity as:
5 Mirza Hasanuzzaman, Introduction To Agriculture And Agronomy, (Agriculture and Agronomy Handbook) 6 E Hornbroo, A Terminology, An Introduction to Agriculture and Agronomy 4
a situation that exists when people lack secure access to sufficient amounts of safe and nutritious food for normal growth and development and an active and healthy life.7 Food insecurity exists whenever the availability of nutritionally adequate and safe foods or the ability to acquire acceptable foods in socially acceptable ways is limited or uncertain. Factors that lead to food insecurity include non-availability of food, lack of access, improper utilization and instability over a certain time period. Food insecurity, as measured in the United States, refers to the social and economic problem of lack of food due to resource or other constraints, not voluntary fasting or dieting, or because of illness, or for other reasons. Food insecurity is experienced when there is (1) uncertainty about future food availability and access, (2) insufficiency in the amount and kind of food required for a healthy lifestyle, or (3) the need to use socially unacceptable ways to acquire food.8 For this reason food insecurity is measured as a household-level concept that refers to uncertain, insufficient, or unacceptable availability, access, or utilization of food. It is experienced along with some closely linked consequences of it. There is a strong rationale for measuring food insecurity at the household level. It is possible for individuals to be food secure in a food-insecure household, just as it is possible for individuals to not be poor in a poor household, depending on the intra household allocation of resources. When a household contains one or more food-insecure persons, the household is considered food insecure.9
7 Pasquale De Muro and Matteo Mazziotta, 'Towards a Food Insecurity Multidimensional Index (FIMI)’ www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/ERP/uni/FIMI.pdf , 9. (accessed 19 June, 2017)
8The National Academic Press,’Food Insecurity and Hunger in the United States: An Assessment of the Measure (2006) https://www.nap.edu/read/11578/chapter/5, 45. (accessed 19 June, 2017) 9 The National Academic Press,’Food Insecurity and Hunger’, 46.
5
Nigeria as a nation is seriously facing food insecurity resulting from violent conflicts, 10 climate change, land degradation, famine, over dependence on foreign import, which affects the programmes etc. Food insecurity in Nigeria exists when people lack sustainable physical or economic access to enough safe, nutritious, and socially acceptable food for a healthy and productive life. Food insecurity may be chronic, seasonal, or temporary. Nutritional consequences of insufficient food or under-nutrition in include protein energy malnutrition, anemia, vitamin A deficiency, iodine deficiency, and iron deficiency. Lack of sufficient food in Nigeria have led to the establishment of various agricultural programmes from 1960-2016. The question that begs for answer is, have these agricultural programmes tackled the question of food insecurity in Nigeria? UNDERSTANDING AGRICULTURAL POLICY AND PROGRAMME IN NIGERIA Agricultural policy starts from an identification of problems and issues. This process typically involves a broad range of mechanisms, including the voice of concerned citizens and consumers, lobbying activities by stakeholder groups, political pressures and inputs from the research community and other experts. Ideally this process leads to a definition of broad policy objectives. What do we want to achieve? It is, of course, desirable that policy objectives are ultimately formulated in precise operational terms, so as to have a proper basis for assessment and to enhance accountability.11 Nigerian’s agriculture is characterized by low farm incomes, low capacity level to satisfy food and fibre needs of the country, and primitive techniques of production. It is in fact a prototype of peasant agriculture which has been described by various writers as being caught in a 10 Charity Manyeruke, ‘The Effects of Climate Change and Variability on Food Security in Zimbabwe: A SocioEconomic and Political Analysis’, The Special Issue on Behavioral and Social Science © Centre for Promoting Ideas, USA www.ijhssnet.com, 3. (accessed 7 January, 2017) 11 Frank Van Tongeren ‘Agricultural Policy Design and Implementation: A Synthesis, https://www.oecd.org/tad/agricultural-policies/40477848.pdf. (accessed 19 June, 2017)
6
vicious circle of poverty.12Nigeria's agricultural policy is the synthesis of the framework and action plans of Government designed to achieve overall agricultural growth and development. The policies always aimed at the attainment of self-sustaining growth in all the sub-sectors of agriculture and the structural transformation necessary for the overall socio-economic development of the country as well as the improvement in the quality of life of Nigerians. The main features of agricultural policies in Nigeria include; the evolution of strategies that will ensure self-sufficiency and the improvement of the level of technical and economic efficiency in food production. While agricultural Programmes are plan of action aimed at accomplishing a clear agricultural objective, with details on what work is to be done, by whom, when, and what means or resources will be used. Agricultural programmmes are programmes that have well defined aim and objectives to improve food security through the provision of subsidies to farmer in the form of fertilizer, tractors, insecticide, seedling, farming equipment, loan through agricultural bank, World Bank, foreign organization and international donor agencies.13 These programmes were initiated and implemented by the Government of Nigeria either singly or in conjunction with the World Bank, other financial agencies, foreign donor agencies, state or local governments, among other bodies. Such programmes usually started as pilot projects and then were expanded to cover all or most states and or local governments in the country to make them ‘national’ in outlook. Conscious of the strategic importance of agriculture in the economic, the government of Nigeria formulated and implemented national agricultural programmes aimed at boosting agricultural production.
12 Godwin Chukwudum Nwaobi, ‘An Evaluation of Post-Independence Agricultural Policies In Relation to Economic Development in Nigeria (1960 - 1987)’ Available at: http://myprofile.cos.com/gcnwaobi, 3. (accessed 23 March, 2017) 13 . Agber, Iortima, And Imbur, ‘Lessons from Implementation’, 240.
7
Below is an analytical narrative tabulation of agricultural programmes from 1960-2016. This table brings to fore the understanding whether these agricultural programmes introduced and established have to food security.
S/ N 1
2
3
Table 1: Explanatory Analysis of Narrative of Agricultural Programmes, with specific objectives and Failure from 1960-2016. Regime/Administr Tenure Agricultural Aim/Objectives Failure/ Problems ation Programmes Nnamdi Azikiwe 1960-1966 Regional Agriculural To provide enough food for Much priority was not given to and Tafawa Belewa Progrmmes (RAP) Nigerians. Enough food crops, the regional Civilian Western RegionAgricultural raw-materials agriculture programmes was an Administration Cocoa and Coffee for industries, exportearning inheritance of colonial Mid-West Regionand jobs for about 6 million agricultural policy of cash crop Rubber People. export. Lack of unity, ethnicity Eastern Region-Oil and political disagreement Palm affected the programmes from Northern Regionbecoming a success. Ground-Nut and Cotton Gen. Yakubu 1966-1975 National Accelerated To educate farmers on Farmers who could not form coGowon Food Production methods of food crop operatives were left out Military Regime Programme production. Organize programme relied on (NAFPP) workshops/seminars for disbursement of credits and farm farmers. Provide jobs. Large- inputs through cooperative scale Irrigation and export. societies. Sudden withdrawal of funding by the FGN due to the introduction Operation Feed the Nation. In other words, it lacked farmer’s participation. The River Basin The provision of Irrigation Development facilities. Bringing more land Intensive political Authorities (RBDAs) under cultivation. Increase interference. ,substantial public the total output per farmer, funds were wasted to streamline construction of feeder roads sizes & functions of RBDAs to the rural areas construction through the disposal of their of fish ponds. non-water assets.
Gen. Olusegun Obasanjo Military Regime
1976-1979
Agricultural Development Projects (ADP)
To over-emphasized modern & high Input technology. Untimely supply of subsidize inputs; high labor mobility etc.
Operation Feed the Nation (OFN)
Is to reduce the cost of bread basket for the average family unit in Nigeria, by cutting down on the demand for
8
There was shortage of funds, untimeliness of subsidized input supply, high frequency of labour mobility, limited involvement of input agencies, dwindling funding policies & counterpart funding, intricacies of technology transfer etc. Indiscriminate use of land for farming activities; most farmers were very young and inexperienced hired labour was
certain food items. to encourage domestic food production by encourage the spirit of self –sufficiency and national reliance in food 4
Alhaji Shehu Shagari Civilian Administration
1979-1983
Green Revolution Programme (GRP)
5
Gen. Muhammadu Buhari
1983-1985
Back To Land (BL)
6
Gen. Ibrihim Babangida Military Regime
1985-1993
Directorate for Food, Roads and Rural Infrastructure (DFRRI)
Structural Adjustment Programme (SAP)
Better Life for Rural Women (BLRW)
The FGN ensured the success of the programme by providing agrochemicals, improved seeds/ seedlings, irrigation system, machine, credit facilities, improved marketing and favourable pricing policy for the agricultural products and encouraged farmers to produce food, cash crops, and livestock. The programme’s aim is to achieve agricultural productivity and to cater for the growing population. The programme encouraged the rural farmers to engage in full time agricultural production to close the gap of food insecurity ravaging the country. The programme was designed to improve the quality of life and standard of living of the rural dwellers through the use of many resources that exist in the rural areas and mass participation of the rural people.
the main source of labour employed by participants; there was absence available markets and livestock diseases caused havoc on farms of the novice farmers. There was delay in execution of most of the projects involved in the programme. There was also no monitoring and evaluation of the projects for which huge sums of money were spent.
It achieved little owing to inherent weakness like inadequacy of data, insufficient input and technological deficiencies among others.
The poor quality of infrastructures provided by the directorate due to embezzlement / mismanagement of fund, proper focus and programme accountability made the impact of the programme almost insignificant.
SAP provides strategies on food crops, livestock, industrial raw materials, wildlife, forest and fish production. It also provides policies on support services such as agricultural extension, technology development and transfer, etc.
SAP had more of an impact on the distribution of farm incomes than on agricultural growth and productivity. Mismanagement of fund and corruption led to the down fall.
Aimed at stimulating & motivating rural women towards achieving better standards of living and sensitizing the rest of Nigerians to their problems.
Cultural and religious inhibition of the Muslims that do not allow easy access to women in ‘purdah’ reduced level of participation and consequently 1ed to low level of benefit
9
National Fadama Development Project (NFDP)
National Agricultural Land Development Authority (NALDA)
7
General Abacha
Sani
1993-1998
Family Support Programme (FSP) Family Economic Advancement Programme (FEAP)
1999-2007
National Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy (NEEDS).
Military Regime
8
Chief Olusegun Obasanjo Civilian Administration
National, Special Programme on Food Security (NSPFS)
It also encourage recreation and enrich family life; and inculcate the spirit of selfdevelopment particularly in the fields of agriculture
accruing from the programme.
This approach is in line with the policies and development strategies which emphasize poverty reduction, private sector leadership and beneficiary participation.
The land reform act/decree has been criticized most as what highly placed officers used to usurp land that belonged to poor people.
NALDA aims at giving strategic support for land development, promoting better uses of rural land and their resources, boosting profitable employment for rural dwellers, raising the level /standard of living of rural people, targeting and assisting in achieving food security through self-reliance and sufficiency. The programme stressed on areas like health, education, women in development, agriculture, child welfare and youth development, disability, destitution, income generation as well as facilitating the provision of shelter for the less privileged in the society from ongoing housing programme of government. NEEDS offered farmers improved irrigation, machinery and crop varieties which would help to boost agricultural productivity and tackle poverty head on since half of Nigerian’s poor people are engaged in agriculture.
Unskilled handling of water application through irrigation degrade and deplete the soil of its productive capacity
NSPFS assist farmers in increasing their output, productivity, income, strengthening the effectiveness of research and extension service training and educating farmers on
Insufficient knowledge of credit use, poor extension agentfarmer contact, unavailability of labour to carry out essential farming activities, lack of modern storage facilities and high cost of farm input and
10
It is unfortunate that these programmes (FSP and FEAP) died as soon as the administration that initiated them was dethroned thereby limiting their impact on the women and the masses.
Corruption, mismanagement, lack of accountability and proper planning.
farm management for effective utilization of resources; supporting governments efforts in the promotion of simple technologies for selfsufficiency. Root and Tuber Expansion Programme (RTEP)
9
Alhaji Umaru Musa Yar’adua Civilian Administration
2007-2010
Seven-Point Agenda. (SPA)
10
Goodluck Ebele Jonathan Civilian Administration
2010-2015
Agricultural Transformation Agenda (ATA)
11
Alhaji Muhammadu Buhari Civilian Administration
2015-2016
Agricultural Transformation Agenda (ATA). Adopted from Goodluck Jonathan
RTEP hopes to achieve economic growth, improve access of the poor to social services and carry out intervention measures to protect poor and vulnerable groups. It also achieves food security and stimulates demand for cheaper staple food such as cassava, yam, potato etc as against more expensive carbohydrate such as rice. SPA aimed at strengthening agribusiness through institution of profitability and price support mechanism, land tenure changes, aggressive development and supply of new land, strengthening of farmer support groups through commercial farmers, improvement of rural access infrastructure, and resuscitation of the River Basin Development Authorities RBDAs ATA is focused on major policy reforms to eliminate corruption in the seed and fertilizer sectors, improve the functioning of market institutions, establish staple crop processing zones to attract private sector into areas of high production to reduce post-harvest losses, add value to locally produced crops and foster rural economic growth. Buhari ATA continuation policy include developing domestic value chains for commodities like rice, wheat, maize, and soya beans;
11
difficulty in integrating technology into existing production system
Problem of market, lack of accountability, lack of proper planning, only the small farmers were the target of the programmes.
The programme which targeted at massive food production does not carry the peasant farmers along, problem of monitoring and evaluation, poor input and marketing access.
Corruption, embezzlement of funds, lack of transparency, Islamic insurgency, herdsmen and farmers conflict lack of planning, monitoring and evaluation etc, hinders the actualization of this programme.
History is likely to repeat itself because Buhari administration tends to focus on the fight against corruption and attention is not giving to agriculture but
strengthening agricultural export markets for products including cocoa, cassava, oil palm, and sesame; providing a better enabling environment for agricultural development by improving infrastructure, designing clearer policies, and improving working relationships between the tiers of government; and providing better inputs, tools, and training that allow farmers to increase their yields Anchor Borrowers Programme (ABP)
Uplifting thousands of small farmers out of poverty and to generate millions of Jobs opportunities for the unemployed
only in theory.
Keen interest is not given to agro-sector.
Source: Table compiled by Author
The analysis of the table above is taken from the perspectives of various agricultural programmes according to regimes/administration from 1960-2016. It further showcased the regimes/administrations of Gowon, Babangida, Abacha and Chief Obasanjo to have more than one agricultural programmes. From 1960-2016, agricultural programmes were introduced to bring about food security, but the table clearly showed that almost all the programmes failed to tackled the question of food insecurity, because of the followings below. First and foremost, it is worthy of note to comment that agricultural policies are not specific and are handled as cross sectorial policy related to forestry in which environmental factors also come into play e.g. forest policy (1945). Developed economies have their agricultural policies spelt out for the masses and the world to know. Also a policy should have strategy, targets, goals, specific objectives and most importantly programme geared towards accomplishment of the goals. This is not the case in Nigeria! When one takes a closer look at the above analysis one will understand that, there were several agricultural policies but no
12
agricultural programme to carry out the directives of the policies. Sometimes, agricultural programmes are not consequences of agricultural policies. For example in the military era where very few agricultural policies, decree and act existed with invention of numerous agricultural programmes like NAFPP, OFN, ADP, RBDA, GR, DFRRI, BLP, FSP, FEAP and NALDA which was initiated in 1992 much more later than the decree (1978) and an act (1979) backing it.14 There was always the present of conflict between different agricultural programmes: This may be due to new administration, lack of interest and invention of new policy and programme. For example there was conflict between FSP and FEAP while that of DFRRI and ADP in many states were most pronounced. Reports has it that DFRRI merely removed the sign post of some ADPS and replace it with its own to lay claim to the construction of certain rural roads and borehole.15 Also before the streamlining of RBDAS to the original eleven, much resource wastage had occurred in time of role confusion and role conflict with ADPS as well as inefficient direct production activities. Subsequently, short duration of agricultural policies and programmes also affected the attainment of food security: In Nigeria, there has not been continuity of existing programme by incumbent and new administration so that impact of the programme will be realized. Examples FSP (1994) and FEAP (1996), OFN and RBDAS were initiated almost the same time (1976) and initiation of NAFPP in 1972, OFN in 1976 and GR in 1980. 16 All these changes retard development progress and do not allow the development policies and programmes to fulfill their mission and mandate to overcome the Nigeria food crisis. 14 J.C. Iwuchukwu. and E.M, Igbokwe, “Lessons from Agricultural Policies and Programmes in Nigeria” Journal of Law, Policy and Globalization ISSN 2224-3240 (Paper) ISSN 2224-3259 Vol 5, 2012 11, 16.
15 G.B. Ayoola, The Agricultural Economy 1: A Book of Readings on Agricultural Development Policy and Administration in Nigeria, (Ibadan TMA Publishers, 2001) 16 Iwuchukwu and Igbokwe, “Lessons from Agricultural”..,17.
13
Lack or inadequate monitoring and evaluation of programmes: Evaluation is purposely done to determine achievements of rural development programme vis a vis the set aims/objectives. Evaluation techniques can serve to improve implementation and efficiency of programmes after interventions have begun, provide evidence as to the cost efficiency and impact of a specific intervention within and between policy sectors. Evaluations especially continuous/on-going and stage by stage evaluation are important because they expose lapses associated with achievement of programme objectives thereby affording opportunities for adjustment. Unfortunately, importance of monitoring and evaluation has not gained full recognition in Nigeria. This is evident in GR where there was no monitoring and evaluation of programme which huge sums of money was spent on executing. 17 There is urgent need to reverse this situation so as to ameliorate the persistent failure of agricultural policies and programmes in Nigeria. APPRAISAL OF AGRICULTURAL PROGRAMMES AND FOOD SECURITY The agricultural programmes are meant to tackle the problem of food insecurity, but this is not the case in Nigeria. Agricultural programmes in Nigeria have not fully actualized its full potential of making Nigeria a food secured nation. Different agricultural programmes were introduced from 1960-2016 to tackle the problem of food insecurity but yet Nigeria stills lack adequate food to feed its citizens due to the growing population. Malthusian population thesis found an application in Nigeria context, according to Robert Thomas Malthus: There is a natural tendency for population to increase faster than food supply, he projected that, while population grows at geometrical progression18 {1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32‌..}, food supply can only increase arithmetically {1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6‌..}, this he said is the cause of poverty and food insecurity.19 17 Ibid, 17. 18 Eric Roll, A History of Economic Thought (Faber and Faber Limited 1992), 176. 19 Cited in, Robert B. Ekelund Jr. and Robert F. Lebert, A History of economic Theory and Method (Mcgrew-Hill Publishing Company, 1990), 133.
14
Nigeria’s population increase in a poly geometrical progression, much faster than food supply. Agricultural programmes did not help in providing adequate food to all Nigerians due to lack of continuity in the progammes and further research; lack of ability and will-power from the managers or managerial staffs and unqualified agricultural specialists were not often used, this gives room for favoritism, cronyism and nepotism, cloud the programmes success . If some programmes had taken so long with proper planning, monitoring and evaluation probably food insecurity would have become a success story. Corruption further compounded the level of food insecurity, Nigerian leaders and those saddled with the task at various levels of federal, state and local government saw golden opportunities to amass wealth and enriched themselves. This has trickled down to affect most of the agricultural programmes, because funds meant for the transformation of the agricultural sector were siphoned to personal or private pockets. From the ab initio, every stage of the agricultural programmes in Nigeria envisaged providing small scale farmers with high-yielding varieties of seeds, tractors, fertilizer, insecticides, and other farming equipment at subsidized prices. Under the National Accelerated Food Production Programme NAFPP in1972, for example, farmers were to pay half the cost of machinery over a three years period. While the Green Revolution Programme GRP in 1979 which was an adoption of Operation Feed the Nations (OFN), turned to small scale farmers to increased food production. Despite the enormous investment, the agricultural revolution failed and food supply continued to increase at arithmetical progression in contrast to geometrical progression of population growth. Also in retrospect, the 1970s oil boom, agriculture fell into dismal neglect. Many farmers rushed to the urban areas to cash in on the new jobs and opportunities this made the agricultural programmes incapable of providing food security. Increasingly, Nigeria turned to imports to feed 15
its growing population. By the 1980s, food production had tumbled by nearly 10% and food imports represented 15% of all imports. According to Ayittey,20 Babangida administration reshaped agricultural strategy by placing more emphasis on rural infrastructure and development. The Directorate for Food, Roads and Rural Infrastructure (DFRRI) was created in1986 for the purpose of boosting food production. But it failed because many project were conceived, designed and executed without monitoring, evaluation, planning and consulting the local communities that were supposed to benefit.21Nigeria resorted to import and spent an enormous amount on imported food. Nigeria spent USD $635 billion on wheat imports and USD $356 billion on rice imports. By 2010 it spent USD $217 billion on the import of sugar and USD $97 billion on fish imports. By 2004, the country was spending USD $3 billion a year on food imports including rice, chickens, and dairy products, even with that more Nigeria’s went about hungry. In a nutshell, from 1990s to 2016, Nigeria’s agricultural sector continued to be plagued by high labour costs, credit scarcity, systemic corruption and deteriorating infrastructure, fertilizer shortage, corruption etc, hinders most of the agricultural programmes from its aims and objectives.
CONCLUSION This paper has attempted to provide a historical overview of the agricultural programmes and food insecurity in Nigeria from 1960-2016. The paper has revealed clearly that there is an
20 Omorogbe Omorogiuwa, Jelena Zivkovic and Fatima Ademoh, “The Role of Agriculture in the Economic Development if Nigeria” in European Scientific Journal February 2014 edition vol.10, No.4 ISSN: 1857 – 7881 (Print) e - ISSN 1857- 7431, 142. 21 George B. N. Ayittey, African Unchained, 253.
16
oxymoron relationship between agricultural programmes and food insecurity in the Nigeria’s context. From the historical perspective of these various agricultural programmes above, one cannot help but notice how well written the aim and objectives of these programmes were put in place but the actualization of these programmes never saw the light of day. The failure of agricultural programmes in Nigeria cannot be examined in a vacuum but must be studied within the context of socio-economic and political setting. For sociopolitical reasons, Nigerian leaders, until recently generally neglected agriculture in pursuit of oil revenue, which made these agricultural programmes becomes a fashion show. Also, with the oil windfall Nigeria’s leaders saw a golden opportunity to amass wealth that was supposed to channel for agricultural programmes. If corruption can be eradicated success in agricultural production will go a long way. Nigeria’s leaders must know that the solution to Nigeria’s agricultural sector is not dependent on foreign technological transfer and of increasing modern inputs such as tractors, fertilizer and foreign loans; Nigeria should significantly raise budgetary allocation to agriculture and fight against corruption. Diversifying the economic is the solution to Nigeria’s economic growth where other sectors will support the agricultural sector especially the industrial sector to avoid the “Dutch Disease”.
17