IIILQIHILHQIMIHILHLHWIIIHIUHHHHII("I f 7 8031 APPROPRIATE DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES FOR DEVELOPING COUNTRIES: LESSONS AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS FOR PROMOTING SMALL-SCALE AGRICULTURE IN NIGERIA BY George Ikechukwu Eziakor A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Resource Development 1983 GIQOS‘SS‘ ABSTRACT APPROPRIATE DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES FOR DEVELOPING COUNTRIES: LESSONS AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS FOR PROMOTING SMALL-SCALE AGRICULTURE IN NIGERIA BY George Ikechukwu Eziakor The dilemma facing most developing countries is that not one developmental problem--but a set of inter- related problems (e.g., food shortage, housing, health and nutrition inadequacies, illiteracy)--must be solved through comprehensive national planning. Perhaps the most serious of these problems is the inability to adequately feed their teeming population. While population growth rates have increased in most of these countries, domestic food produc- tion has, in contrast, declined. This study is devoted to exploring the feasibility of using appropriate production technologies as a means for increasing agricultural productivity among small land- holders in the developing world. This focus is noteworthy in light of the fact that significant production and pro- ductivity increases can be generally achieved in the small farm sector of these countries. The study objectives are to 1) review older and George Ikechukwu Eziakor new conceptualizations of national development as they re- late to agricultural development; 2) define the nature and essential elements of an "appropriate" technology; 3) re- view various approaches that have been used to introduce new agricultural technologies; and 4) analyze examples of Third World agricultural growth and development strategies. The major policy recommendations drawn from the study include: 1) greater emphasis is placed on a basic needs strategy for achieving appropriate development in the 19803; 2) promotion of a "bottom-up" approach with active citizen participation in program planning and imple- mentation; 3) reliance on the development and dissemination of appropriate production technologies for enhancing pro- ductivity levels on small farms; 4) restructuring of the public service incentive system as a means to encourage indigenous researchers to engage in "grass roots" action research directly related to the needs of small producers and the rural sector; 5) establishment of an active linkage between agricultural research and the extension education functions of the Ministries of Agriculture and Natural Resources; and 6) promotion of the formation of relevant small-farmer based organizations to articulate the needs of small holders and serve as their bargaining "voice". ACKNOWLEDGMENTS There is no doubt that the production of this document would have been extremely difficult, if not impossible, without the invaluable suggestions, encourage- ment and support received from several quarters, too many to be mentioned by name. However, this section provides an excellent opportunity for recording the author's gratitude and appreciation to at least, some individuals. This author is particularly indebted to Professor Frank A. Fear, my indefatigable dissertation director, for his professional guidance and generous assistance. His encouragement and incessant constructive criticisms pro- vided the inspiration needed for reviewing this document many times, in order to improve its quality. The author would also like to record his gratitude to all members of the Guidance Committee. Special thanks are due to Professor Eckhart Dersch, my academic adviser and chairperson of the Guidance Committee. The mature and candid manner in which he handled my ideas and problems immensely lightened the burden of my entire doctoral pro- gram at Michigan State University. Other members of the Guidance Committee who have kindly reviewed my dissertation and provided useful ii feedbacks include Professors Richard Farace and Manfred Thullen. Until his departure to Nepal on a UN assignment, Professor George Axinn also provided useful insights, especially during the initial process of formulating suit- able objectives for this study. The author is quite appre- ciative of all the useful inputs from these fine persons. My father, Chief Felix Nwafor Eziakor, and my beloved mother, Iyom Grace Chiekwue Eziakor, have continued to serve as the potent source of the author's strength and determination to succeed. They constitute an "elixir" to me. Thanks are also due to my home governments (Anambra State and the Federal Government of Nigeria) for providing financial and morale support at various times during the author's academic career. Finally, the author wishes to thank Jo McKenzie not only for her fast and accurate typing of this document, but also for her enthusiasm in helping to beat the Graduate School deadline for submission of this dissertation. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chapter I INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . II III Food Insufficiency in Sub-Saharan Africa: The Nature and Scope of the Problem . . . . . . . . . Problem Statement . . . . . . . . Rationale for the Study . . . . . Objectives and Organization of the Study . . . . . . . . . . TOWARD A NEW PARADIGM FOR NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT IN THE DEVELOPING COUNTRIES: IMPLICATIONS FOR AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT . . . . . An Early Conceptualization of National Development . . . . . . Reactions to the Early Concept of National Development . . . . . . Redefinition of the Approaches to and Perspectives on, National Development . . . . . Alternative Conceptualizations of National Development . . . . . . The Place of Agriculture in the Third World. . . . . . . . . The Place of Agriculture in the Development of Nigeria . . . . . THE MEANING, NATURE AND SCOPE OF APPROPRIATE TECHNOLOGY: FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF SMALL-SCALE PEASANT AGRICULTURE. . . . . . . . iv IMPLICATIONS Page viii ix ll 16 16 18 25 28 4O 45 50 Chapter Appropriate Technology in Perspective. . . . . . . . . . . . Toward an Understanding of the Concept, "Appropriate Technology". . What is Technology?. . . . . . . . What is "Appropriate"? . . . . . . The "Semantics" of Appropriate Technology. . . . . . . . . . . . Characteristics of an Appropriate Technology. . . . . . . . . . . . The Origins of, and Rationale for, the Development of Appropriate Technology. . . . . . . . . . . . Essential Principles of an Appro- priate Technology for the Developing Countries. . . . . . . Key Dimensions of Appropriate Technology . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Socio-Cultural Dimensions of Appropriate Technology. . . . . . The Inter-cultural Transfer of New Technology. . . . . . . . . The Socio- -economic Dimensions of Appropriate Technology. . . . . . The Political Dimensions of Appropriate Technology. . . . . . The Ecological Dimensions of Appropriate Technology. . . . . . Appropriate Technology for the Development of Small-Scale Agri- culture in the Third World . . . . . IV THE NATURE AND STRUCTURE OF NIGERIAN AGRICULTURE: IMPLICATIONS FOR THE DESIGN AND DIFFUSION OF APPROPRIATE TECHNOLOGIES FOR ENHANCING PRODUCTIVITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Nigerian Agricultural Sector: Background Information . . . . . . . The Dualistic Nature of Nigerian Agriculture. . . . . . . . . . . . . The Relevance of Small-Scale, Peasant Agriculture in Nigeria. . The Place of Large-Scale, Com- mercialized Agriculture in Nigeria . . . . . . . . . . . . . Small-Scale Versus Large-Scale Agriculture in Nigeria: Impli- cations for the New Emphasis on Development of the Former . . . . V Page 50 51 51 54 57 59 61 66 69 7O 72 75 78 81 85 90 9O 92 95 99 104 Chapter The Need for a New Approach to Agricultural Development in Nigeria: Design of Appropriate Technologies for Small Farmers . . . . Models and Strategies for the Design and Introduction of Appro- priate Technologies for Small- Scale Farmers. . . . . . . . . . . . . Swanberg's "Requirement-Limita- tions Gap" Model. . . . . . . . . . Strengths and Shortcomings of Swanberg's Model. . . . . . . . . . The Farming Systems Research (FSR) Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Origins of Farming Systems Research. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Objectives and Characteristics of the Farming Systems Research Approach . . . . . . . . . The Modus Operandi of Farming Systems Research. . . . . . . . . . Types of Farming Systems Research. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Some Empirical Results of Farming Systems Research. . . . . . Sole Versus Mixed Cropping. . . . Traditional Versus Improved Cotton Technology. . . . . . . Problems and Future Needs for the Implementation of Farming Systems Research. . . . . . . . . Future Needs of Farming Systems Research. . . . . . . . . . Integration of Small Farm Develop- ment Research Strategies ("Upstream" and "Downstream" FSR and Swanberg's "Requirement-Limitations Gap" Model) . Toward the Development of Appropriate Technologies for Small-Scale Farms: A Typology of Improved Technologies for Farmers. . . . . A Typology of Improved Agricultural Technologies. . . . . . . . . . . Type I Technologies . . . . . . . Type II Technologies. . . . . . . Type III Technologies . . . . . . Type IV Technologies. . . . . . Implications of the Typology of Improved Agricultural Technologies. . . . . . . . . . . . vi Page 109 112 112 117 118 119 122 125 128 131 131 134 136 138 140 144 146 148 152 154 155 156 Chapter Page V TOWARD AN UNDERSTANDING OF THE PROCESS AND MODELS OF AGRICULTURAL GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT IN THE THIRD WORLD: IMPORTANT LESSONS AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS FOR NIGERIA . . . . . . . . 159 An Overview of the Process of National Growth and Agricultural Development in the Developing Countries. . . . . . 159 The Process and Models of Agricultural Growth and Development in Nigeria. . . 163 The Commercialization/Monetiza- tion Model. . . . . . . . . . . . 165 The Industrialization Model. . . . . 168 The Agro-Industrial Model. . . . . . 172 Toward an Understanding of the Nigerian Small Farmer Situation. . . . 175 Identifying the Nigerian Small Farmer. . . . . . . . . 175 Conceptual Frameworks for Analyzing Nigerian Small Farm Development Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 180 Relevant Small-Farm Development Policy for Nigeria . . . . . . . . . 184 Typology of Approaches for Solving Small Farm Development Problems. . . . 187 The Integrated Approach. . . . . . . 189 The Comilla Project . . . . . . . 190 The Puebla Project. . . . . . . . 195 The Non-integrated or Partial Approach. . . . . . . . . . . 199 The Ibiruba Pilot Project in Southern Brazil. . . . . . . . . 200 The Filter-down Approach . . . . . . 203 Additional Future Research Issues . . . 206 VI SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . 209 REFERENCES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221 vii LIST OF TABLES Table Page I—l Calories Per Capita, Selected Countries, Sub-Saharan Africa, 1977 . . . . . . . . 2 II-l Exports of Major Commodities in Nigeria by Economic Sectors. . . . . . . . . . . 46 II-2 Nigerian Food Imports, 1960-70 . . . . . . 49 IV-l Percentage Distribution of Farmers According to Size of Farms in Nigeria, 1972. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94 IV-2 Comparison of Sole and Mixed Crops Grown by Farmers in Three Areas of Northern Nigeria (1966-68). . . . . . 132 viii Figure I-l II-l III-1 III-2 III-3 IV-1 IV-2 IV-3 LIST OF FIGURES Population Growth Rates (1950-2000) in Sub-Saharan Africa, Asia and Latin America . . . . . . . . . . . Index of Food Production Per Capita in Sub-Saharan Africa . . . . . . . Yields of Staple Crops in Sub-Saharan Africa, Asia, and Latin America . . Continuum of a Developing Country-- An Appropriately Developed Country and the Alternative Routes to Appropriate Development . . . . . . Technology Defined as an Input/Output System. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Conflicting Growthist and Appropriate Technology Perspectives on the Rela- tionship of Economic Development and Quality of Life . . . . . . . . Opposing Perspectives of the Growthists and Appropriate Technology Advocates on the Relationship of Level of Economic Development and Quality Of Life 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 The "Vertical" or "Top-Down" Model of Agricultural Research and Development . . . . . . . . . . . . Bridging the Requirements-Limitations Gap by Constraint Reduction . . . . Schematic Representation of Some Determinants of the Farming System. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix Page 36 54 64 84 101 114 126 Figure Page IV-4 Schematic Framework for Farming Systems Research at the Farm Level--Downstream Farming Systems Research. . . . . . . . . . . . 129 IV-S A Typology of Improved Technologies According to a Two-fold Framework for Appropriate Resource Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 V-l A Four-Sector Model of Development. . . . 160 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Food Insufficiency in Sub-Saharan Africa: The Nature and Scope of the Problem The dilemma of most developing countries, including Nigeria, stems primarily from the urgent need to boost the domestic production of staple food items for feeding their teeming populace. While population growth rates have con- tinued to increase in most of these countries, domestic food production has, in contrast, declined. The consequences of this declining food production have been reflected in several ways. Inadequate human nutrition and per capita calorie intake, which are clearly estimated to be below minimum nutritional standards, have been reported in several countries (see Table 1-1). It has also been reported in a 1980 World Bank Study (cited in USDA, 1981) that about 193 million people--estimated to be more than 60 percent of Africa's total population--suffered from "seriously inadequate calorie intake." The irony of the current situation stems from the fact that, in the decades of the 505 and early 603, several African countries (including Nigeria) were net exporters of certain basic food commodities. But, since the 1 CALORIES PER CAPITA, SELECTED COUNTRIES, 2 TABLE l-l SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA, 1977 Percentage of Percentage of Region and nutritional Region and nutritional country requirements country requirements Percent Percent The Sahel: Central Africa—- Chad 74 continued Gambia -- Equatorial Mali Guinea -- Mauritania 86 Gabon -- Niger 91 Zaire -- Senegal 95 Upper Volta 79 East Africa: Burundi 97 West Africa: Ethiopia 75 Benin 98 Kenya 88 Cameroon 89 Rwanda 98 Ghana 86 Somalia 88 Guinea 84 Sudan -- Guinea-Bissau -- Tanzania 93 Ivory Coast 105 Uganda 91 Liberia 104 Nigeria 83 Southern Africa: Sierra Leone 93 Botswana -- Togo 9O Lesotho 99 Madagascar 115 Central Africa: Malawi 90 Angola 91 Mozambique 81 Central African Zambia 87 Republic 99 Zimbabwe 108 Congo 103 Source: = Not available. USDA (1981:4). 3 70s, most of these countries have been increasingly unable to foster the domestic production of their food require- ments. Food import costs have continued to soar and balance-of-payment deficits have been reported. The previ- ously referenced USDA Report (l981:7) reported that: . . . if domestic production trends continue, Africa's demand for food imports will be two to three times its present level by 1990-—even without significant income growth. A number of reasons have been advanced by scholars and researchers to explain the precarious food balance situation in most of these African countries. These rea- sons include: increases in population growth rates, underdeveloped human resources, political instability, and "insecurely rooted and ill-suited institutions, to such external factors as balance-of-payments deterioration and consequent unfavorable terms of trade (World Bank, 1981). However, much of the food production problem has been attributed to the supply-side dilemma. This notion appears to have been supported by the USDA Report (1981:8), which indicated that: While the population growth rate of Sub-Saharan Africa is high, there has been poor growth in productivity and aggregate food production. In addition, a recent United Nations study (1977) showed Sub-Saharan Africa as the only developing area of the world where population growth rates will continue to increase throughout the decade of the 805 (see Figure 1—1). In con- trast, however, available evidence amply suggests that Rate of rowth ercent 3 0 g (p ) Sub-Saharan Africa 2.6 2.4 2.2 2.0 18 1 I l I L_ 1 Jr 1 J 195055 55-60 60-65 65-70 70-75 75-80 80-85 85-90 90-95 95-2000 Figure I-l. Population Growth Rates (1950-2000) in Sub-Saharan Africa, Asia and Latin America SOURCE: UN (1977) . 0.2.. o( 1961-65 avg wo—- 115 — l/’ I x” )1 i .-r " 110 »— Ilsa .0: I \\/ / \ ' I / \ 4x" ’ // .\ J, \ 1’ m5 ,nq \ 5 / \., .-’I \l x/ \*:I \I i ’ v m0 I 95 90 Sub-Saharan Africa 80— 75 l 1 l j l l L l l l J 1 l J 1961- 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 65 avg. Figure I-2. Index of Food Production Per Capita in Sub-Saharan Africa SOURCE: USDA (1981). 6 aggregate food production and productivity have been remarkably low, if not stagnated, in several African countries. Data presented in Figure 1-2 reveal that, in comparison with the other developing regions of the world, Sub-Saharan Africa has been described as the only region where per capita food production declined over the past two decades. The USDA Report (1981:10) also indicated that the aggregate production of major staple food crops in Sub- Saharan Africa show the following trends: . . . has grown very slowly--about 1.8 percent per year . . . (and) is below the aggregate growth rate of Asia or Latin America (the other two com- paratively equally developing areas of the world and so with apparently similar development prob- 1ems--see Figure 1-3). The serious implications of the foregoing observa- tions for the African continent in general, and for Nigeria (the primary focus of this study), are quite evident. It can be contended that this dangerous trend poses a serious threat to the survival of the continent in the near future. Achievement of a reliable food surplus has been described as one of the most fundamental prerequisites for national development. Therefore, the need for African nations to attain this goal cannot be overemphasized. Thus, this study is one of many recent efforts aimed at a diagnosis of the food production problems facing Sub-Saharan Africa. Problem Statement As already indicated, several reasons have been adduced to explain the poor performance of the economy of Kg/Ha 13.000 12.000 11,000 10000 9.000 8,000 7.000 6.000 Kg/Ha 2.000 1.750 1.500 1.250 1.000 750 Knga 800. 700 600 500 4’10 _. Roots and Tubers ~ J Latm America Sub-Saharan Atnca W (— Pulses Latm Amenca .. 1965 67 69 71 73 75 77 Figure I-3. Yields of Staple Crops in Sub-Saharan Africa, Asia and Latin America SOURCE: USDA (1981) . 8 Sub-Saharan African countries in recent times. The dominant internal factors include: 1) rapid increases in population growth rates (as high as 2.5 percent per year in the 19605 and 2.7 percent annually in the 19705); 2) underdeveloped human capital in terms of a scarcity of educated people with requisite managerial skills and tech- nical expertise; 3) unimproved health programs (e.g. poor family planning); 4) mass illiteracy; and 5) the dominance of land-extensive agricultural systems (in a region where high population pressure has drastically reduced the land area available for farming (USDA, 1981; World Bank, 1981). It has also been reported that the great diversity of ethnic and cultural groups in Sub-Saharan Africa has resulted in frequent political fragility and turmoil, there- by hampering economic progress and development. The major external factors often cited include the increasing balance- of-payments deficits and the consequent unfavorable terms of trade that face many Sub-Saharan African countries. However, it would not be feasible to deal with all of these issues/problems in this study. Because the achievement of a reliable staple food surplus through domestic production has been described as the fundamental prerequisite for appropriate development, this study will explore ways of boosting the domestic supply of staple food through land intensive agricultural systems (as compared to land extensive means). Available evidence clearly indicates that much of 9 the staple food production in many African countries (e.g., Nigeria, Kenya) takes place in small peasant farm holdings. It is also known that the majority of the rural population is largely engaged in what has often been described as "sub- sistence-type" agriculture. Growth in food production has been generally achieved through increases in the cultivated area, in contrast to increasing aggregate production through increases in yield per acre or productivity. But, with the ever increasing population pressure and the encroaching urbanization on farm land, the declining productivity of these peasant farms can no longer be offset by continued in- creases in the cultivated area. The constant land resource base (and the decreasing farm land), coupled with the steady increase in population growth rates, makes the effectuation of the law of diminishing returns almost inevitable in the near future. This increasing awareness has been the basis of the recent calls for alternative agricultural strategies for fostering rapid increases in productivity of the remain- ing farm land areas. The basic tenet of this study is that productivity increases in small-scale farm sector can be achieved through the design and introduction of appropriate production tech- nologies for use by small holders. Nigeria (a typical developing country in Sub-Saharan Africa--at least in terms of national development problems and needs) will be used as the analytic "case in point" in this study. It should be pointed out that the proposed tenet of this study is in 10 direct contrast to the relatively recent advancement of, and concentration on, the development of large-scale, capital and energy-intensive, commercial farms by several governments in Nigeria. In this study, therefore, the precise determinants of the "appropriateness" of the advocated alternative technologies, especially designed for the small—scale farms (as well as the strategies for their successful development and diffusion among the identified target population [viz., the small holders]), will be ex- tensively reviewed. Rationale for the Study The prevalent farming systems in Nigeria, as well as in most African countries, exhibit a characteristic "dualistic structure." This dualism consists, firstly, of small-scale peasant farms. Here labor inputs are typi~ cally supplied by family members who utilize relatively simple traditional farming tools and production techniques. The accessibility of the small farmers to modern production techniques or agricultural innovations, where it is possible, has often been limited by numerous environmental, as well as institutional, constraints. Large-scale commercial farms also exist and they employ substantial amounts of wage labor as well as modern, highly sophisticated, capital and energy- intensive farming tools and production techniques. Accord- ing to Eicher and Baker (1982), large-scale farming in Sub- Saharan Africa dates back to the colonial era when planta- tions and large European farms were introduced in order to ll produce "cash or export crops" for the "mother country." However, studies on the essential differences be- tween the above mentioned farming systems have revealed several significant findings. For example, Reynolds (l975:4) has observed: Research from countries as diverse as Colombia and India indicates that the small farms apply more labor and other variable inputs per acre of land and achieve higher yields per acre. Large farms are less labor-intensive and achieve lower yields per acre but higher yields per man-hour. It is plausible that the advocated emphasis on the design and introduction of appropriate production technologies can result in higher yields per man-hour on small-scale peasant farms. Also taking cognizance of the abundant labor supply conditions (relative to capital), as well as the high demand for profitable employment opportunities in Nigeria (and in several other African countries), it can be con- tended that aggregate food production and productivity in- creases can best be achieved through the development and introduction of appropriate technologies for the small farmers. It is also pertinent to note that the new concep- tualizations of national development call for the provision of: 1) minimum adequate standards of the basic human needs (e.g. food, employment, and shelter); and 2) equity in income distribution (Streeten, 1979). In contrast, the scarcity of capital, as well as skilled manpower supplies in the developing nations, clearly suggest the 12 inappropriateness of heavy reliance on large-scale, highly sophisticated, capital and energy-intensive technologies for agricultural production. Another major rationale for this study arises from the following observations by Evenson (1975:192): Programs designed to transplant modern technology have continuously come up against the realization that the technology offered often had little or no advantage over the traditional methods, given the economic, soil, and climatic conditions facing producers. A case can, therefore, be made for the fact that there are many significant socio-cultural,political and institutional constraints facing the small farmers that ought to be identified and carefully analyzed. It is only through such critical analyses that one can begin to comprehend the small farmers' environment and,subsequent1y, can design the types of production technologies aimed at enhancing agricultural production on small—scale farms. Objectives and Organization of the Study The present study is aimed at accomplishing the following objectives: Objective 1 The first objective of this research is to review-- in Chapter 11—-older and newer conceptualizations of national development and to relate the current paradigms of develop— ment to the process of agricultural development in Nigeria. More specifically, it is hypothesized that the appropriate development of Nigeria (or many other developing 13 countries for that matter) should have as a fundamental starting point the design and introduction of appropriate technologies for the agricultural development of small—scale peasant farms. Based on the essential elements of the new models of development, and also recognizing that the major- ity of the poor in Nigeria are still mainly engaged in small-scale peasant farming with its characteristic low productivity, a case will be made for the injection of appropriate production technologies to enhance the produc- tivity of this farming system. Objective 2 The second objective of this study is to explore the full meaning of technology and to identify, and then describe, the essential elements of new production technol— ogies that can be classified as "appropriate" for a speci- fied target population (namely, the small-scale or large- scale farmers). Therefore, Objective 2, which will be treated in Chapter III, seeks to establish the precise determinants of the "appropriateness" of any given produc- tion technology or agricultural innovation for an identified farming system. Specific attention will be devoted to the description of the characteristics of appropriate technol- ogies for small-scale peasant farmers. Objective 3 The third objective--to be considered in Chapter IV --is to discuss and review the models and current approaches 14 that have been used for the design and introduction of new technologies (more specifically, agricultural innovations) on the prevalent farming systems in Nigeria. Therefore, this chapter will, first,review the "dual structure"of the existing farming systems in Nigeria. Historically, it has been assumed that accelerated food production could only be achieved through the introduction of highly mechanized and capital—intensive agricultural pro— duction patterns. But available evidence suggests that this approach has not only failed to solve the food production problems of the country but, more importantly, has largely ig— nored the needs and production problems of the poor majority of small farmers who produce the bulk of the staple food needs of the populace. Current approaches, such as the Farming Systems Research [FSR] (which gives "voice" and attention to the needs of small-scale farmers) will be reviewed. Objective 4 The fourth objective of this study (the focus of Chapter V) will be to review the process and models of agricultural growth and development in the Third World, in general, and in Nigeria, in particular. The significance of the new emphasis on small farm development, as well as the strategies and conceptual frameworks for analyzing small farm development problems, will be discussed. In order to draw clear lessons for planning and policy making in Nigeria, this chapter will also include a 15 review of relevant case studies and pilot projects that have been designed to improve the welfare of small holders through the enhancement of productivity in their small farms. Also, future research needs for agricultural growth and development of the small-farm sector will be discussed. The final chapter (that is, Chapter VI) will include the conclusions of this study, and based on those conclusions, a set of policy recommentations. CHAPTER II TOWARD A NEW PARADIGM FOR NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT IN THE DEVELOPING COUNTRIES: IMPLICATIONS FOR AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT An Early Conceptualization of National Development The decades of the 505 and 605 were characterized by the gaining of political independence by many colonies of Western European countries. Concurrently, the indigenous power elites, who took over the control and management of national governments, strived for ways to effectively accelerate the growth and development process in their former colonies. These leaders believed that political independence would automatically bestow economic independence to the new nation-states. Little did they know that several latent economic and institutional "strings" would remain unsevered. Abundant supply of unskilled labor appeared to be the most conspicuous factor of production that was readily available in most of these former colonies. There was an obvious scarcity of capital and skilled level manpower supply. It, therefore, became imperative to rely on Western scholars and a handful of indigenous experts (whose academic backgrounds were frequently of Western origin) to 16 17 design ways of, and strategies for, achieving the rapid national development of the former colonies. But, as one might expect, the thinking of these scholars and policy makers was greatly influenced by the historical development pat- terns of the industrialized western Euro-American countries. Consequently, the early definitions of national development centered around the criterion of eco— nomic growth--i.e., economic growth was seen as the basic ingredient for national improvement. Within this perspec- tive, industrialization was regarded as the most important tool for achieving economic growth and, hence, development. Additionally, the socio-economic transformation of Western Europe and the United States, which resulted largely from Industrial Revolution, was seen as the primary rationale for this mode of thinking. The significantly different socio-economic and institutional settings, such as the abundance of unskilled labor and limited technology sup- plies (in contrast to scarce capital and improved technol- ogies),did not suggest the need for exploring alternative development routes for the new nation—states. Likewise, the non-existence of colonies (which had provided the much- needed raw materials and other resources at exceedingly low prices for the industrialization of the West), did not seem to provide a rationale for seeking alternative development pathways. In essence, the apparent differences in culture, values, and aspirations between the peoples of the developed and the developing world did not surface as strong reasons 18 for looking at the issue of national development differ- ently (Rogers, 1976). Beltran (1974:11) accurately described this early approach as the "classical materialistic model" of national development. The GNP has been described as the main basic index of this model of development. Rogers and Svenning (1969:18) also described this early model of development as essentially consisting of: . . . a type of social change in which new ideas are introduced into a social system in order to produce higher per capita incomes and levels of living through more modern production methods and improved social systems. Reactions to the Early Concept of National Development The early model of development failed to generate the expected increases in rate of growth and development of the new nation-states. It was also observed that rather than "bridge the gap" between the rich and the poor, this model of development appeared to ignore the equity concerns associated with growth and development. In other words, even where there were recorded increases in GNP, there were no observable improvements in the welfare and liveli- hood of the poor majority in these newly independent countries. To support the above assertions, Uphoff (1973) has observed that: . . . there can be growth without development (changes only in scale) and development without growth (changes only in structure). . . there 19 is no assurance that resources generated from a "growth" strategy will or can be diverted or devoted to developmental investments as is commonly assumed by conventional economists . . . Development to be productive must of course lead to growth in some longer run. Following a similar line of reasoning, Rockefeller (1969: 1-2) has contended that: Growth is primarily an economic phenomenon, a process of expansion or improvement of the basic productive elements of land, labor and capital . . . Development, on the other hand, is much broader in scope and concept. It is often used as a synonym for progress, and progress in- volves a host of social, cultural, political and psychological factors that may be much more sig- nificant over the longer run than purely economic factors. Axinn (1977) has also refuted this early conceptualization of development in which it was assumed that the process was linear and irreversible. It is strongly contended that the process may, after all, be cyclical in nature. In arguing against this early "materialistic model" of national development, Beltran (1974:13) has concluded: It entails a dehumanized vision of progress which stems from the eminently mercantile mentality that rules much of life in the nations which have reached the highest levels of advancement. It equates having more with being better. It does indeed confuse means with ends; sacrificing the highest values of human beings -- dignity, justice and freedom--to abundance and prosperity at any price . . . for the prvileged minorities. It should be noted that several development scholars (Rogers, 1976; Seers, 1977; Wignaraja, 1976) have charac- terized this early model of national development as con- sisting of the following elements: 20 ’/ Z. The achievement of economic growth and deveZooment 7 sation and n 7 o ‘ ’o . 1" I 1‘ o 1 4- I; 1 A. was conceived primariiy through inausi tats accompanying ubranization. The obvious assumption here was that the rate of national development and performance could only be quanti- fied in economic terms, such as, through GNP and per capita income. It was also wrongly assumed that the benefits of growth would automatically "trickle down" to the large un- privileged majority, mostly located in the rural areas and urban slums. Rogers (1976:125) remarked that the concen— tration of national incomes in a few hands and the subse- quent inequality were erroneously "thought to provide in- centives for hard work and sacrifice and to act as a moti- vating force for individuals to invest in a lengthy formal education . . ." Moreover, the ease of measuring economic growth through the use of such indices as GNP and per capita income appeared to be enough rationale for their acceptance as indicators of national development. But, unfortunately, the dearth of high-level manpower and technical skills, which are essential for the industrialization process in the developing countries, was not considered a major hind- rance to the success of the process. 2. The indiscriminate importation of complex, highly sophisticated, capital and energy-intensive tech- nologies from the industrialized countries was witnessed in most Third World nations. Despite the obvious scarcity of capital and indig- enous high-level manpower during this period, the "gospel of big is better" was enthusiastically spread by many Western 21 development scholars. The indigenous power elites at the helms of national governments unquestionably embraced that gospel with similar zeal. Massive importation of complex, high-energy technologies was embarked upon-—sometimes with foreign assistance loans. This approach to development not only increased dependency on the industrialized economies but, more importantly, worsened unemployment and poverty conditions of the populace. The welfare of the masses was apparently ignored, and living conditions deteriorated in several countries. Igbozurike (1976:29) reported that in Nigeria, for instance, industrialization programs were characterized by: Plans (that) were ill-conceived and poorly exe— cuted, with little or no feasibility studies. In many cases, narrow political motives guided the siting of projects and industrial plants . . . (and) Earnings from peasant agriculture, which was virtually left to take care of it- self, were ploughed into questionable industrial ventures. Amin (1974) also noted that the limited success of the industrialization efforts could be attributed to the peri- pheral character of Third World development. According to Amin (1974:9), the peripheral systems are: . . . dominated by production of luxury goods and exports and the consequent lack of internal mass markets. This leads to growing inequality, technological dependence . . . (and) . . . marginalization. The assumption at this point was: economic growth constitutes the primary goal of development. Its necessary accomplishment could only be possible through the 22 importation of sophisticated, capital and energy-intensive technologies. Problems of poverty, inequality, and social justice were considered to be of secondary importance. Several writers (Seers, 1977; Rogers, 1976) have noted that the classic argument advanced in defense of this develop- ment strategy was: inequality was necessary, not only to generate savings, but also to act as an incentive for hard work and productivity. This strategy, it was argued, would invariably promote economic growth-~the indicator of national development during the period. Available evidence also indicates that the marked dissimilarity of the physical, socio-cultural and economic characteristics of the tropical environments of most devel- Oping countries (in contrast to the temperate environments of the industrialized nations), was not given much consid- eration in the technology transfer process. They were mostly ignored. Even the problems of environmental pollu— tion and degradation of the industrialized nations, which have resulted, in part, from the massive and indiscriminate use of high-energy technologies, were not seen as strongly persuasive arguments for prescribing alternative develop- ment pathways for Third World countries. It seemed as if the rationale was merely as follows: Because the Western countries achieved development via the industrialization route, it is only reasonable to expect the developing countries to follow a similar pathway. 23 3. The idea of centralized economic planning and national decision-making (a "vertical" or "top-down" approach) was advocated by Western scholars and practiced by indigenous power elites. Rogers (1976:215) has observed that one of the characteristic features of Third World development was that: . . . almost every country in Asia, Africa and Latin America established a national develop- ment commission during the 19505 and 19605. Mostly four-year, but sometimes five-year,development plans were painstakingly formulated to guide economic development activities of national governments. In other words, a "top- down" approach to program design, planning, and execution was the rule--rather than the exception--in most developing countries during this period. Western scholars and develop- ment economists were often relied upon to provide the blue- print for national development and "modernization" of the indigenous population. The indigenous power elites often colluded with Western planners and academics in dismissing the populace as merely "conservative," "primitive" and "illiterate peasants" who did not know what they needed. A "needs assessment" approach to program planning and development was considered unnecessary and futile. Neither was local or "grass roots" participation in problem identi— fication and decision-making thought to be of any value or consequence. Development programs, which were supposedly aimed at improving the welfare and quality of life of the populace, were merely imposed from "above." 24 4. The early conceptualization of development assumed that the developing countries themselves were directly accountable and responsibl for their underdevelopment and economic backwardness. In other words, the early models of development assumed that the causes of poverty, mass deprivation, and economic stagnation were to be found within the developing countries themselves, rather than in their external relationships with the industrialized nations (Rogers, 1976). Most scholars found it convenient to down-play the adverse effects of colonial exploitation on the fragile economies of most Third World nations. The heavy taxation of these former colonies with respect to their human and material resources for achieving growth and socio—economic transformations of the industrialized countries was not given the deserved attention in world development litera- ture. Even the resulting ecological destruction, as well as the environmental degradation, of the former colonies were not considered sufficiently strong reasons for the socio-economic stagnation of most Third World countries at independence. But Franke and Chasin (1980:63) have strongly argued that "African historical development was harshly interrupted by the expansion of European colonialism." They also remarked that, before the colonial intervention, the people of most Third World nations evolved very effec- tive means of using their environmental resources and for organizing their unique types of productive systems that 25 were well-suited to their specific ecological conditions (Franke and Chasin 1980:40). Empirical research findings reported by several scholars (e.g., Norman, 1980; Okigbo, 1976) strongly support these assertions. However, the eco- logical destruction of the mostly tropical environments of the developing nation-states largely resulted from the in- discriminate colonial exploitation of these former colonies. Franke and Chasin (1980:4) have also argued that: The relationship between ecological destruction and food production is thus direct and close. Whenever an environment is degraded, deprived of its basic resources--or often of even one of the key resources—-that environment becomes a part of the world food crisis, and the people who live there becomes its victims. In the light of the above, it is not surprising today that several developing countries experience an acute indigenous food shortage. Redefinition of the Approaches to, and Perspectives on, National Development The deficiencies associated with the early model of development soon became apparent to development scholars and planners alike. The indiscriminate importation of com- plex, capital and energy-intensive technologies from the industrialized nations failed to generate the expected in- creases in growth and productivity. Old (1977:VII) observed that, by the late 605,there was an obvious awareness among scholars that there were: . . . apparent incongruities between the goals of the developing countries, their labor con- ditions and other resource endowments, and 26 the technologies these countries were im- porting. The consequences of this early development approach, which merely aimed at rapidly transforming the fundamentally traditional agrarian societies of the developing countries into highly mechanized industrial societies, are also evi- denced in the following observations from Wijewardene (1979:1): Derelict remains of agricultural machinery piled high on government and '1arge-scale' farms all over the tropical belt offer mute testimony to the failure to impose the tools and systems of temperate European and American agriculture upon the totally different conditions of the tropical environment. In addition, McLaughlin (1976:44) remarked that, during this early period of national development history, the developing countries were merely: . . . littered with inoperative tractors, trucks, generators, pieces of road equipment, and pumps that are rusty from lack of maintenance and spare parts. The imported tools and equipment were not only capital and energy-intensive, but were equally so complex that they could not be easily understood or effectively used by the populace that they were meant to benefit. Thus, the in- appropriateness of such imported technologies cannot be overemphasized. Even when there were recorded increases in economic growth and productivity from the use of such high—energy technologies, Misra (1981:52) noted that the: 27 . . developing countries found to their dismay that the poverty of the masses continued to be appalling. Because of the non-participatory nature of the early development strategies, as well as the "top-down" approach to the design and execution of development programs, it was apparent that such recorded increases in economic growth and productivity did not benefit the poor majority. Conse- quently, mass unemployment, absolute poverty,and the asso- ciated social strife and violence have continued to rise unabated in several developing nations. It has also been reported that, in most of the Third World nations, the "quality of life" witnessed further deterioration--even when the GNP and per capita incomes have risen (Misra, 1981). The implications of the foregoing seem to be obvious: an unsuccessful attempt to impose an alien pattern--Western European and American styles of,and strategies for, develop— ment upon the different socio-cultural, economic, and political conditions of the developing countries. In con- trast, it is now being recognized that national development involves more than mere economic growth, and therefore, cannot be synonymous with, or substituted for, it. Develop- ment has now come to involve human beings--meeting their basic human needs and, subsequently,aiming at the improve- V/ ment of the general welfare of all citizens of any one nation-state. It is, therefore, not surprising to notice recent intensified efforts by development scholars and planners to propose alternative pathways of, and strategies 28 for, national development of the Third World nations. Alternative Conceptualizations of National DevelOpment It is now strongly argued that the process of national development requires a more complex picture of the nature of societies--their socio-economic, cultural and political patterns--than had been previously considered. It is becoming increasingly evident that development cannot be considered as being synonymous with an increase in GNP and per capita incomes--irrespective of the distributional effects of such increases in economic growth. Employment patterns, health and nutritional standards of the populace, and equity in income distribution have all become important indicators of the level of national development. Eradica- tion of mass poverty and deprivation has also become a major objective of the emerging paradigm of development. Schumacher (1973:168) has made the following pertinent Vi remarks: Development does not start with goods; it starts with people and their education, organization, and discipline. It is in the light of this new awareness about the important ramifications of national development that Case and Niehoff (1976:9) have also observed that: . . . one of the most significant changes in the theory and practice of development may be described as the 'demise of the GNP concept," i.e., the re— pudiation of the assumption that if the gross national product (GNP) is increased, the benefits of such increase somehow automatically 'trickle down" to large numbers of people (cited by Woods 1977:l). 29 Therefore, there is now a tendency to incorporate distribuw tive justice, mass poverty eradication, and other socio- economic, cultural, and political goals as essential ele- ments of the new paradigm of development. More precisely, the social welfare and economic well-being of the poor in the developing nations are now regarded as the fundamental concern of the new development paradigm. The rising unemployment, inequality,and deteriorating "quality of life" of the poor in the developing nations have also led to the "loss of faith" in the early model of devel- opment. Moreover, several writers (Hag, 1971; Ladejinsky, 1970) have predicted that the rising unemployment levels, coupled with the continued concentration of wealth and subsequent mass deprivation, may create serious social tensions and lead to increased crime rates and violence. This dangerous trend may promote serious social, as well as political, instability in most Third World countries. The new national development paradigm addresses these con- cerns . l. The Basic Needs Approach is now viewed as central to national development This strategy of national development stresses the need for equality of distribution and also strongly urges the provision of minimally adequate levels of essential human needs. These basic human needs include: the pro- vision of profitable employment, adequate nutrition, ). 30 shelter, water, education, transport, electricity, simple household goods, as well as non-material needs, such as "grass-roots" public participation in program design, planning and implementation. There is also great emphasis on cultural identity and the establishment of a high sense of purpose in life and work; these important elements interact with the material needs of humans (Streeten, 1979). The "new" approach to development does not seem to be an entirely new concept. It can be easily likened to the "subsistence norm" concept, which had been advanced long ago as a basis for ensuring optimum income distribu- tion in any given society or target population. Schickele (1944:9) had suggested that the best income distribution is essentially "one that equalizes opportunities among all individuals of society . . . The implication of this assertion, when translated in practical terms, is that "everyone should grow up and live in an environment of at least minimum adequate standards of health, nutrition, clothing, shelter and education" (Schickele, l944:9). However, according to Schickele (1944), the exact determi- nants and quantitative contents of the minimum adequate Standards of the essential needs may vary with the "cultural patterns, the state of the arts, and the size Of the social product relative to population." In other words, it may be unrealistic, if not preposterous, to eXpect the same or similar levels of "minimum adequate Standards" in, for example, a highly industrialized and 31 prosperous country "X", as compared to a developing and perhaps economically stagnant country "Y". Nevertheless, it is now strongly rgued that nation- states will derive more social benefits through the pro" vision of subsistence claims to the populace rather than the denial of such claims. In most Third World countries, where such claims have not been met directly, or the oppor- tunities for their realization seem to be non-existent, the consequences have been grave--in terms of absolute poverty and starvation, and subsequent increases in social strife and violence. Therefore, the urgent need for the incorpOW ration of a basic needs approach to national development programs in these countries cannot be overemphasized. ("3 o ’ -. IT. A '5. 7 ' '\ ~‘\ J— . r7. ‘4‘ r, q: 1 n + nan 2. Greater emphases is now placed on the intlcauc. on c' 7 ’71 7 7 1. .- 12.1 ,.' , an? o; propitavoe small—scale, iapor—iniensive, and ' z: ”7 «a «7. .{fa‘n +00 4v . capital-saving as cell as energg-savtng, technologies. Considerable concern is now being expressed by development scholars for the need to concentrate efforts on the development of simple, low-cost technologies that are accessible to the poor of the developing countries. Most modern high-energy technologies are not only expensive, but are also difficult to comprehend and effectively utilize, especially by the illiterate mass majority in mostrThird World countries. In other words, these technologies are often highly taxing of those scarce resources (such as, energy, capital and high-level or skilled manpower) that are not easily available in the developing countries. 32 Thus, several writers (Rogers and Shoemaker, 1971; Zaltman and Duncan, 1977) have found that the complexity and non- compatibility of innovations are inversely related to their rate of adoption by a target population. Other researchers (Norman, 1980; Navarro, 1977) have also observed that a sound developmental approach should always aim at building upon, rather than destroying, what is already in place. This assertion seems to have arisen out of the increasing realization--backed by empirical evidence--that many rela« tively simple traditional production systems, which have been used for generations in the Third World countries, are quite sound (Norman, 1980; Jodha, 1978). Therefore, a case is now being made for the preservation, as well as the improvement of, such hitherto ignored, production systems and practices. In other words, there is an advocation for the integration of traditional or endogenous production systems with modern or exogenous production systems in the design and development of simple, low-cost, and small-scale technologies for the populace in the developing nations. By so doing, it is envisaged that the values, aspirations, and cultural patterns of the target popula- tions, as well as the resource endowments of their environ- ments, are taken into due consideration in the design of improved technologies for their profitable use. 33 3. Another essential element of the new paradigm of national development is an emphasis on the need for a socio-cultural identity and self-reliance in development. This strategy for national development stresses the importance of introducing citizen participation in decen- tralized program planning and decision-making. It, there- fore, calls for a "grass roots" involvement in, or a "bottom-up" approach to, problem identification as well as program planning and implementation. This new approach to national development is in direct contrast to the early dominant paradigm which, among other things, emphasized centralized planning and decision-making--a "top-down" approach to problem identification, program design and execution. Misra (1981:53) has reported that the early concep- tualization of development was based on the following assumptions: . . . that all of human society is homogeneous and is imbued with the same culture, history and level of development--no matter how one de- fines development. As stated earlier in this study, there was also the faulty assumption that it would be appropriate to base development strategies on purely Western life-styles and experiences. But as Misra (1981:53) has remarked, those Western experi- ences and development styles were peculiar "not only in terms of time but also in terms of history and circumstances." It has therefore been suggested that appropriate development must fundamentally emanate from "within." It 34 has also been proposed that real development should be channelled through the avenues that each identified socio- cultural system provides. On this score, Misra (1981:52) has observed that: . . a culture-neutral development can dis- rupt the identities of peoples and societies leaving the so-called developed man completely bewildered and lost. Thus, the case is now being made that, for development to be real and meaningful, the target population should be actively involved in the design, planning, and implementa- tion of all development programs. In other words, rather than impose development programs from above, the populace should be directly involved (i.e., actively participate) in problem identification as well as in making decisions that affect their lives. 4. Finally, the new conceptualization of development emphasizes the precise identification and analysis of both the internal (or endogenous) and external (or exogenous) causes of underdevelopment in any given nation-state. Rogers (1976:219) has reported that the early model of development "assumed that the main causes of under- development lay within the underdeveloped nation rather than external to it." It was customary for researchers and writers to dismiss the populace in the Third World countries during this period as being highly conservative, fatalistic, and unresponsive to innovations and efforts to improve their lives. Tradition and modernity were simply regarded as antitheses of each other, without any linkage whatsoever. 35 But it is now known that the early model of devel- opment failed to recognize the devastating effects of such external constraints and relationships as the: . . . international terms of trade, the economic imperialism of international corporations, and the vulnerability and dependence of the recip- ients (mostly Third World nations) of technical assistance programs (Rogers, 1976:219). Furthermore, Misra (1981) has established that tradition and modernity appear to lie on a continuum with a large transi- tional zone. This suggests that a direct linkage exists between them. It can also be asserted that the several points on this transitional zone may indicate the various positions or levels of national development that have been achieved by the various developing countries (see Figure II-l). In other words, the individual broken lines in Figure II-l illustrate the identifiable development pathways and strategies that any one developing country may opt to follow in the quest to achieve national development. Also realizing that the shortest distance between two points is a straight line, and that some of the broken lines in Figure II-l are neither straight nor parallel to each other, it is easy to infer that some developing countries may in- advertently opt for a "longer and rougher" development route. This may entail the choice of unproductive, if not inappropriate, styles of, and strategies for, national development. But the nation-state that follows the "straight line" pathway to national development appears to be one that incorporates the new elements of development 36 Over-Developed Country Transitional Zone Developing Country fl ’$< Appropriately (mostly a tradi- h )4 ~\’\ .'. .nfi',.—-—-‘ Developed Country tional a rarian 1’ _. mostl a modern .9 L’J’a’ v~ ‘. Y. . soc1ety '_.. 1ndustr1al soc1ety) Under-Developed Country Alternative Path- ways to Appropriate Development Figure II-l. Continuum of a Developing Country—-An Appropriately Developed Country and the Alternative Routes to Appropriate Development 37 into its national development plans and strategies. In View of the negative externalities that have been associated with the Western styles of development, it can be argued that few developed countries can now be described as "appropriately" developed. Therefore, it is possible to locate some industrialized nations at some points on the transitional zone and further suggest that, in recent times, these countries appear to be striving to be appropriately developed. Until these industrialized countries can effectively combat the pollution and environ- mental degradation problems that.%ave been directly linked with their strategies for development, they cannot lay valid claims to appropriate development. Thus, it is tempting to conclude that the cyclical pattern of development, which appears to depict the Western model of development, may, after all, not be ideal for the‘ developing nations (see Figure II-l). For one thing, it pre-supposes that there still exists the colony (under- developed country), whose natural resources (human and materials) had been indiscriminately over-exploited in the colonial era for the industrialization of "mother country" (over-developed country). In this sense, it becomes easy to visualize why and how the former colonies were being "under-developed" and why and how the imperalist countries were being "over-developed." But, today, with the limited re- sources available within the national boundaries of each inde- pendent nation-state, and the fact that the transfer of these 38 resources from one national boundary to the other are usually preceded by active bargaining between the govern— ments of the countries involved, it is inconceivable that some nations can still afford to "over-develop." This appears to be the reason why each nation-state--developed or developing--is now striving to be appropriately devel- oped. In the light of the foregoing, the view is, there— fore, strongly expressed that each nation-state should opt to follow the "shortest" routes to appropriate development. The decision regarding which developmental pathway should be followed will depend, among other things, on the unique needs of that country as well as on her resource endowments. The guiding principle should be based on the provision of the "greatest good" for the greatest number of the citizens for the longest time. This appears, given current develop- ment thinking, to be the ultimate goal of national develop- ment. Consequently, several writers (Schramm and Lerner, 1976; Rogers, 1976) now view development as the specific societal transformation towards the kind of social, political and economic system that a country ultimately decides it needs. Rogers (1976:225) also views it in the following, more holistic manner: . . . as a widely participatory process of social change in a society, intended to bring about both social and material advancement (including greater equality, freedom, and other valued qualities) for the majority of the people through their gaining greater control over their environment. 39 In order to further stress the recent people- oriented, as well as culture-centered nature of the new conceptualization of national development, Beltran (1974: 13) contends that: National development is a directed and widely participatory process of deep and accelerated socio-political change geared towards producing substantial changes in the economy, the tech- nology, the ecology and the overall culture of a country, so that the moral and material advance- ment of the majority of its population can be obtained within conditions of generalized equality, dignity, justice, and liberty. It is, therefore, fair to state that the new con- cepts of national development are not only people and culture—oriented, but they also stress the need to ensure that development takes place in accordance with sound eco- logical principles. The citizens are not only expected to be actively involved in making decisions that will affect and change their lives, but it is also absolutely essential to ensure that the implementation of such decisions do not disrupt the balanced relationships that should exist between humans and their natural environments. In other words, a call is now being made for new policies and devel- Opment programs that will not only be physically and bio- logically sound, but must be equally economically feasible, institutionally acceptable, and administratively workable (Barlowe, 1976). 40 The Place of Agriculture in the Third World Because agriculture has been identified as the pri— mary industry and the "engine" for growth in most Third World countries, it is necessary that a section of the study deal with the place and importance of agriculture in national development. To many, agriculture has been described as the "heart" of the economy of most developing countries. It is the primary sector that provides employment and means of livelihood for the majority of the population--especially those living in the rural areas. Loerbrooks (1965) has identified the key roles that the agricultural sector is expected to play in a developing economy: 1. To provide the food requirements of a rapidly growing population; 2. To serve as a major source of raw materials for the developing industrial sector; 3. To provide the volume of exports needed to pay for the import of capital goods; 4. To generate employment opportunities for the additional agricultural working population; and 5. To provide a substantial share of the capital needed to finance the development of the whole economy. It is estimated that, in most developing countries, as much as 85 percent of the population is engaged in sub- sistence agriculture; nearly 90 percent of the rural 41 population is engaged in various forms of farm and non- farm enterprises (Lele, 1981). Available evidence also suggests that the agricultural sector, with an average growth rate of 2.5 to 3 percent, contributes as much as 50 to 60 percent of the GDP in most developing countries. It has also been reported that, with the population of most developing countries growing at 2 to 3 percent per annum and the per capita income consumption rising at only 1 per— cent, there will be an estimated annual increase of 4 percent in demand for food (USDA, 1981). The World Bank (1981) has further re-emphasized this unwholesome trend by observing that, in the 605, the agricultural production of several developing nations grew in volume by 2.3 percent per annum-—or roughly at the same rate as their population growth. But, in the 705, agricultural production dropped to about 1.3 percent per annum, while population growth rates had risen to about 2.7 percent. The implications of the above trend seem. obvious: the data amply suggest the poor performance of the agricul- tural sector in most developing countries in recent years. These gloomy data can, therefore, provide the basis for calling for a thorough re-examination of the past patterns and strategies for agricultural development in these countries. The World Bank (1981:45) has recently observed that the crisis in African agriculture can be traced to the following unique problems or causes: 42 l. The growth rate of agricultural production began to decline and, in the 19705, was less than the rate of population growth almost everywhere; 2. Agricultural exports stagnated and African shares in world trade declined for many com- modities; 3. Food production per capita was, at best, stagnant in the 19605 and fell in the 19705; 4. Commercial imports of food grains grew more than three times as fast as population and food aid increased substantially; and 5. More of the population shifted its consumption to wheat and rice (as evidenced by the soaring imports of these food grains), which increased food dependency and created in many countries a mismatch between local production possibili- ties and consumer demand, since wheat and rice in these countries can only be grown at costs far above import parities. Several factors have been held accountable for the poor performance of the agricultural sector in Third World economies. Prominent among the identified factors is the misallocation of investment, most notably the excessive emphasis on the importation and introduction of large-scale, capital and energy-intensive technologies for agricultural production. The World Bank (1981) has reported that, during 43 the 605 and 705, for instance, many African nations directed a substantial proportion of their agricultural investment to large-scale, government-operated estates--involving heavy capital outlays for mechanization (as with the rainfed crops) or irrigation schemes, or both. It was erroneously assumed that only such a "rapid transition (transformation approach) to mechanized, high productivity schemes, as prac- ticed in the industrialized world, would overcome the stag- nation linked with the traditional low-input, low—output methods" (World Bank, 1981:51). Apart from the fact that the basis for the establishment of these agricultural schemes was often political in nature (as opposed to scientifically based), it has also been reported that the schemes were equally beset with problems of management, overemployment of staff, under-utilization of expensive machinery, and maintenance of equipment and infrastructure (World Bank, 1981). Furthermore, it has been established that the contribution of these large-scale agricultural schemes to growth was quite small when compared to their cost. But, ironically, available research evidence amply suggests that small-scale peasant farms are frequently far more productive than large-scale, estate farms. In com- paring the relative importance and significance of the large-scale, estate farms with the small—scale, peasant farms, Lele (1981:548) remarked that, although the estate sector makes a noteworthy contribution to production: 44 . . . a major share of the total production and marketed surplus nevertheless comes from the small-holder sector. More importantly, even the need to raise the income levels of the rural poor and to generate profitable employment opportunities in the rural sector, now make it mandatory for shifting emphasis to the development and introduction of small-scale and low-cost technologies that will be more beneficial to small farmers. Therefore, this research will focus on the strate- gies for developing suitable technologies for agricultural production on small-scale peasant farms. It has been estab— lished that the bulk of food production in most African countries takes place on these small-scale farms. It is also noted that the majority of the rural population is engaged in small-scale farming for meeting their food requirements and other relevant needs that are vital for their livelihood and well-being. On the basis of this information, this study there- fore posits that agricultural development is fundamental for the socio-economic transformation of several African countries. Since technology has been described as the "engine" or "life-blood" for achieving rapid agricultural development, this study further asserts that appropriate development of African countries can best be achieved through the development and introduction of appropriate technologies for enhancing production on small-scale 45 peasant farms. According to Ventura (1981), technology should simply not be regarded as a mode of production. Rather, for technology to be meaningful and appropriate, it should embody the economic, social, political, cultural and cognitive modes of the target population in which it is to be introduced and utilized. The Place of Agriculture in the Development of Nigeria Agriculture has been described as the "back bone" of the Nigerian economy. This sector was once the most impor- tant source of foreign exchange for the country-—until the relative recent growth in petroleum production. Over the years, the agricultural sector has also provided employment for a large majority of the rural population. The position and relative importance of agriculture in Nigerian economy were expressly stated in the Second National Development Plan (1970-74): Agriculture is still the mainstay of the Nigerian economy, with about 70 percent of the country's labor force employed in this sector. At inde- pendence in 1960, the percentage contribution of the sector to GDP was about 70 percent, although by 1966 it had declined to 55 percent. As displayed in Table II-l, further declines in the contri- bution of this sector have also been reported. By 1970, the agricultural sector accounted for only 33 percent of the total export potential of the country. Furthermore, a significant decline in the percentage of the population engaged in farming has also been reported. People have 46 canuoafiqcz Uwpczoxm HmCOHme>0ud: Ummu>mm .Lmsma .oacocsca >5 cases was I .Aoemav mecca .mouumeumum Lo oofiuwo Haywood "wUmDCu 7.:CL :.tc~ o.ooH o.mvv m.mHm ~.HH~ u I n mupcmxm Hmuoe .1 1.L m.~ m.e m.m 6.4 - 1 . muucaxo-ox 2:. a m. m.nc s.omv n.va m.@0m 1 u u manodxo wanmmsoc Hence 4.” “.5 v.n n.m~ o.mm o.m~ I 1 . mundem taco: ~x.~ m m.w o.®~ H.~H n.ma m.o~ m.m v.- Adam: Cee c..u -.~q m.nH n.vmm o.HMH o.em o.NMH.~m o.ovm.om o.eom.o Amcsnov EdeOnasc u.1 ..e m.: o.~ 0.0 o.o o.a ~.H v.fi wanE3Hom v.Hc .mv m.vm m.mnm n.m¢~ m.Hm n.vv~.am 0.00m.o~ v.mmm.© mDUSUOuQ pcm mamuoce? 9.1 .1 , ”In F.N O.m. V.N I l I WONZUUQWSCQE (“Ewm tam mounuomwsccz n.: L x.~ H.m m.v n.m m.smm.n m.mmv.HH H.m~m.oH A.uw .scv Aczcm Ucm moody secede :.n : M c.m m.m 6.5 «.6 q.mm m.om c.5m Lawnsuacv “annum "In.: 1 ,_.: 1 v1 1 c Ao.c I Aq.o a AH.o v Am.n V Am.n V Am.~ a Hue sac; Av.m 1 IL.M 1 Am.q V Am.oLv 10.0 1 AH.oHV Ao.HxH1 AH.nnHv Ao.mmac maocnox seam 0.x n.m m.v ¢.HH m.oH m.oH m.omH v.vw~ H.ooe mUDUOMQ ELmd mn._ w._ o.H m.m m.v o.v r.v a.~ ”.5 maexm pcm mop“: 10.x V Am.1 . Am.v v v.HHv Ao.oHv .v.m v .m.nm v Ao.nm V Am.no~V Heo uscccscuo Am." . Ao.H V Am.m V Am.m V Ao.m V Ao.v v Am.0mav Am.ho~V Am.ohfiv mxmo uscccsoLo Am.v v ,m.HHV Ao.mav Am.amv Am.mmv Ao.mm. AH.nmmv Aw.nHmV Aw.orwv muscpcsonc 5.x m.¢~ w.vm n.mm v.~m m.mm H.va m.~mn m.mom muospoL; can musco:50nr v.fi mH.H 0.“ c.o m.m m.m n.mm n.mH ~.vm Azmuv cODLOO 4- 1 .o 1 m.~ Aa.o v 1~.o v 1H.o 1 1m.o 1 1~.o c 1m.0m v amazed moooo m.c 1 ,q.t v . AH.H I Am.H v . 15.x 1 Aq.oH a u mxmo mouoo mlq.H 1 .u.m V . Ao.o 1 10.5 1 . m.o 1 An.oH V . swuusb mouoo on.vHV Am.eH1 mflm.vmv Am.oov A©.mmv AN.HmV Aw.mm~V Am.onav Aa.mcmv mason mouoO m.rfi N.0H H.n~ m.mm H.H© m.nm m.HHm H.moH o.vmm mDUJUOLQ czm mooou o.mm w.mq o.mo o.va H.va m.>m~ u 1 u nauseous ummtoG asatsfiocav Hausuasufiumm honor Gama I11-wxmw1. Inpmwwt- nbnma noose meme waned wmoma moofi enasb itcmxu.moLOH Fr, .wn.mUCCru\~r,:L Accfiaafle m.z v 05Hc> AmCOu pcmmsocuv xueamwa mmOFULm UHZCZCUM >m (HmmCHZ 2H mmHFHDOZZOU mOhdz LO mFmCaxm HIHH mdm<fi quGCEECL 47 continued to abandon the agricultural sector--mostly as a result of its unprofitability and the drudgery associated with farming with unimproved tools and production tech- niques. Consequently, the migration of people to urban centers, high unemployment levels, over-crowding in urban slums, increased crime rates, and violence in cities, have been common features. Increased scarcity of staple food commodities and the associated rising food prices have also been reported. Lele (1981:547) has ob- served similar trends in several other African countries where the production of "many subsistence food crops appear to have stagnated or even declined." A recent study by USDA (1981) revealed that, as a result of the higher population growth rate, it is estimated that the annual increase in production required to meet the consumption need of Sub- Saharan Africa by 1990 may be as high as 4.5 percent. It is pertinent to note that this figure is much higher than that reported for other regions of the Third World, reflect- ing the differences in population growth rates as well as food production potentials. With respect to food production in Africa, Gardiner (1968:6) also made the following observations: . . . one of the paradoxes of developing countries, and of Africa in particular, is that their soci- eties, although predominantly agricultural, are becoming acutely short of food. Available evidence clearly indicates that the food deficit situation in Nigeria, since the early 19705, is an apt 48 reflection of the above description. Anthonio (1972) has confirmed that, in the past decade, the importation of food in Nigeria reached an annual average of N22.4 million Naira (equivalent to about $336 million dollars--see Table II-2). Furthermore, a close inspection and analysis of these food imports revealed, according to Anthonio (1972:26), that: . . . Nigeria can conveniently produce most of these foods provided enough impetus in the right direction has been forthcoming from government towards the structural transformation of the rural sector with respect to food production. Because the bulk of food production is carried out under the small-scale, peasant farming conditions, it is the premise of this research that a major part of the required "structural transformation" can be achieved through the development and introduction of appropriate production technologies for enhancing production on small-scale farms. It is also asserted that such technologies can only become "appropriate" if they reflect and embody the socio-cultural, economic, political and acceptable institutional frameworks that prevail among the target population (i.e., the small-scale peasant farmers of Nigeria). Therefore, it is suggested that such improved technologies have to emanate from an integration of the traditional or indigenous production systems with the modern or exogenous production systems. In other words, for the new technologies to be labelled "appropriate" within the context of the small farmers and their farming environment, they have to be "built upon" the original traditional production techniques 49 TABLE II-2 NIGERIAN FOOD IMPORTS, 1960-7O Total Import Import as % Year Value Food Value of Total N million N million Import 1960 220.9 23.9 10.81 1961 222.5 22.7 10.20 1962 203.2 23.5 11.36 1963 207.6 21.9 10.54 1964 253.7 20.6 8.11 1965 275.0 23.0 8.36 1966 256.4 23.8 10.06 1967 220.6 21.3 9.65 1968 192.7 14.2 7.36 1969 248.6 20.9 8.40 1970 376.2 28.8 7.65 Total Av. 1960-70 243.4 22.4 9.20 SOURCE: Anthonio (1972). that are already in existence. This is the basis of the new approaches to agricultural development for the benefit of the small farmers in the developing countries. Therefore, the next chapter will, among other things, identify and analyze the essential characteristics of technologies that may be considered "appropriate" for the prevalent farming systems in Nigeria. CHAPTER III THE MEANING, NATURE AND SCOPE OF APPROPRIATE TECHNOLOGY: IMPLICATIONS FOR THE DEVELOP- MENT OF SMALL-SCALE, PEASANT AGRICULTURE Appropriate Technology in Perspective In the past decade, various labels have been coined by scholars to describe the technologies considered most suitable for use in the developing countries. The labels that have been used to describe these new technologies in- clude: "labor intensive," "low-cost," "capital-saving," "village-level," "intermediate," and "small—scale." In recent times, however, the term "appropriate technology" appears to have gained wide acceptability among scholars. It has been suggested that this wide acceptance has arisen out of sheer recognition of the fact that there are several pre-conditions that determine the degree of suitability of any given technology within a particular environment. In other words, the degree of suitability of a particular technology will largely depend upon the socio-cultural structure and functioning of the target population, the socio-economic and political objectives of the country, as well as on the availability and quality of its productive resources (Old, 1977). 50 51 The nature and development of the concept, "Appro- priate Technology" is examined in this chapter. This will be accomplished through an exploration of its meaning, scope and characteristics. The socio-cultural, economic, politi- cal and environmental dimensions of appropriate technology will also be explored. Finally, the relevance of appropri- ate technology for the agricultural development of small- scale, peasant farms in Nigeria will be considered. Toward an Understanding of the Concept, "Appropriate Technology" Technology is one word that may mean different things to different persons under different circumstances. Therefore, for the purpose of this study, it is essential to review the different perspectives on the word. What is Technology? The use of the word "technology" had been previously limited to the development and utilization of machinery and equipment. It had been narrowly used to describe the levels of sophistication and efficiency of engineering tools and equipment. This use of the word "technology" has, there- fore, not surprisingly led many to believe that the concept originates from the industrialized Western Euro-American nation-states. But Wagner (1979:11) has aptly observed: . . . in fact technologies have been manifest in all modes of human existence since the use of the first tool. Therefore, Wagner (1979:11) views technology in a much broader manner: 52 . . . a technical method or capability for achieving a practical purpose. In other words, it is a methodology or system of employment of tools (a process, if you will) to accomplish some task or create some product. It is not a passive or inert object or a philosophy. Tech- nology is an active dynamic process. Technology is the working arm of experience or science, but is essentially different from either. The product of technology, therefore, is often seen as tangible or a means toward the solution of human problem(s). But Edwards et al,(l980:XI) view tech- nology in a slightly different way: they view it as the industrial arts, that is, the production processes of industry, commerce and agriculture, which comprises the following essential elements: 1. Materials--which refer to the substances that are manipulated; 2. Inanimate Objects--(such as machine and tools) that are employed in the manipulation process; 3. Humans (and also lower animals)--who accomplish the manipulation process for pro- ductive purposes; and 4. Technical Expertise--which include the requisite human knowledge, experience and skills that are applied at the following levels: a. available expertise are needed to "select, grade, modify, accept or reject materials for inputs to the production process, or outputs for the market process;" and b. such expertise are also needed to "design, or build, or operate, or maintain, or adapt to local conditions--the machines or tools of the process." Along the same lines, Ogbuobiri (1980:176) has suggested that technology is: 53 . . . any process, application, or system which makes use of available resources to effect a product for, or effect some impact on, the world of man (or humans). This view of technology, including its dimensions, and characteristics of its product impacts, is illustrated in Figure III-l. From the above perspectives, it is evident that the use of the word "technology" should not be narrowly limited to the modern production of tools and equipment. Further- more, it should not be erroneously conceived as originating from the industrialized West. Although the levels of sophistication and efficiency may differ, humans of all ages and in all parts of the globe have used various forms of technology to solve their problems. This is because "technology" refers to the native ability of humans to utilize their intellectual skills, wisdom, and experience for the solution of practical problems through several methods or techniques (Brown and Usui, 1974). This mode of thinking has been supported by the following conceptualiza- tion of technology: . . . a systematic application of scientific and other organized knowledge to practical tasks (Galbraith, 1967:12). 54 Product Resources\ Impact Technology 0 Type of market for product [Need market Luxury market 0 Impact on culture or life- style 0 Impact on environment 0 Cost 0 Performance and reliability 0 Impact on livability 0 Impact on local economy 0 Impact on foreign economy relative to local economy 0 Impact on continued availability of resources Figure III-l. Technology Defined as an Input/Output System SOURCE: Ogbuobiri (1980). What is "Appropriate"? Several writers have expressed concern over incon- sistencies in the use of the word, "appropriate," when applied to the development and use of new technologies in Third World countries. As can be expected, there is little consensus regarding the meaning of the term. However, several distinguishing elements have continued to emerge from the various perspectives. These elements will now be reviewed. 55 The dictionary definition of "appropriate" is: some- thing "attached as a peculiar attribute or quality, or more generally as something "specially suitable or proper." Rybczynski (l980:2) has used this definition as the basis for arguing that the pertinent issue here is how a tech- nology can be "specially suitable." The relevance of this issue, according to Rybczynski (1980), stems from the fact that almost every technology must be suitable for accomplish- ing something. Similarly, Brown and Usui (1974) strongly argue that, in its correct usage, the word "appropriate" has meaning and empirical content pply through specific reference to a particular situation involving the individual or human group using it. In other words, a new technology or innovation can only become "appropriate" (or "inappro- priate,‘ as the case may be) by specific reference to the criteria or objectives (stated in empirical terms) to be achieved by the identified target population/client system that intends to utilize the new technology. It is even possible, according to Brown and Usui (1974), that the advocated objectives may: 1. p93 be the most desirable (or appropriate) for the identified human group; or 2. the technology employed may not be consistent with reaching the stated objectives. It has, therefore, been argued that the "logic" of the ex- pression "appropriate" can easily allow the usage of the term "appropriate technology" even when referring to 56 incompatible situations. Thus, it is often possible to have different professional perspectives on what should be rightly labelled as an "appropriate technology" for any given human group or target population--especially if the objectives stressed are different. Herein lies the neces- sity for determining the essential characteristics of any technology or innovation that should be labelled "appro- priate, for a particular target population. As previously mentioned, this is one of the primary concerns of this study. Brown and Usui (1974) further maintain that the expression "appropriate technology" cannot be easily used in practice unless the context and the objectives for its usage are clearly specified. Furthermore, a new technology cannot become "appropriate" until it is found to be com— patible with the goals, products, processes, culture, as well as the environment of the identified local target population, in particular, and the nation-state in general (Bhagavan, 1979). According to Bhagavan (l979:9), the pertinent questions to ask in the process of determining whether or not a particular technology is "appropriate" include: 1. Does the technology support the goals of national development policy?; 2. Are the products and services affordable by, and useful and acceptable to, the intended users?; 57 3. Do the production processes make economic use of inputs?; 4. Are the products, processes and related institutional arrangements compatible with the local environment and culture? Based on a similar line of thought, Ogbuobiri (1980:177) has concluded that a technology should only be considered "appropriate" under the following conditions: . . . if it makes the best use of available resources to generate needed products which enhance livability, enhance culture and life-styles, enhance the envir- onment, are competitive, durable, easy to install, operate and maintain, enhance local economy, con- serve limited resources, recycle waste, or other— wise prolong 1ife and promote comfort. The "Semantics" of Appropriate Technology Several development scholars and planners appear to have embraced the importance of introducing new types of technologies that are better suited to the unique socio- cultural, economic, political and environmental conditions of Third World countries. Three major terms that have been commonly used to describe these new technologies (even in anticipation of their discoveries) are: "low-cost," "intermediate," or "appropriate." . Bhagavan (1979) has observed that each of these expressions seems to possess a dominant trait that dis- tinguishes it from the others. For example, while "193 cost" seems to emphasize the economics of production and utilization (indicating that the new technology has to be 58 less expensive than the previous types); "intermediate" is regarded as being somewhere between traditional and modern- ized (thereby laying emphasis on the engineering components of the new technologies). But, according to Bhagavan (1979), the term "appropriate" appears to emphasize the "socio-cultural impact" and may even be further influenced by other ideological considerations and value judgements. Thus, in a period when the new conceptualization of national development, among other factors, strongly advocates for cultural identity and self—reliance in development, it is little wonder why the term "appropriate" appears to have gained wide popularity and acceptance. It is, therefore, evident that the notion of "appropriate" seems to have gained a wider acceptability-- primarily due to its concentration on the welfare and socio-cultural conditions of the indigenous populace of the developing countries for whom the new technologies are designed to benefit. Jequier (1976:19) has also noted that the underlying rationale for this wide recognition stems from the fact that the value and relevance of any new technology are now believed to lie: . . . not only in its economic viability and its technical soundness, but in its adaptation to the local social and cultural environment. However, it is fair to conclude that some writers have used the terms--"low cost," "intermediate," "appropri- ate," and even sometimes "soft," and "alternative" inter- changeably. As aptly noted by Jequier (1976:21), very 59 often the choice of one term in preference to another appears to be a matter of "reflection of differences in emphasis rather than of fundamental difference in nature." However, for the purposes of this study (as well as to maintain consistency) the term "appropriate" will be used. Characteristics of an Appropriate Technology As previously stated in this study, capital and skilled level manpower are two major production factors that are often scarce or in limited supply in most develop» ing countries. These production inputs are also highly expensive and, subsequently, are highly taxing of the foreign exchange reserves of most Third World economies. In contrast, unskilled and semi-skilled labor supplies are often plentiful and cheap. In addition, rising unem- ployment levels and the ever increasing gap between the "haves" and the "have nots" are among the major social ills facing most developing countries. It is in the light of these serious social condi— tions that Bhagavan (l979:9) has suggested that an appro- priate technology for the developing countries should possess the following operational characteristics: . . . (make) intensive use of semi-skilled and unskilled labor, sparing use of capital and highly trained personnel. Foundation on locally and domestically produced inputs, and on national personnel, and not expatriates. Economic effi- ciency of small and medium scale production enterprises. Replication by local entrepreneurs. Production and services mainly for local and regional markets. 60 In the same vein, Huybrechts(l979), as cited by Igben (1981:13), has delineated these criteria for determining the appropriateness of any given technology or innovation. The technology should: 1. be compatible with the tradition (and value systems of the target population); make maximum use of available local raw materials; create the maximum number of jobs (especially in areas of high rates of unemployment or under-employment; demand minimum training and maintenance; be adapted to be used by local firms con- strained by poor financial, technical and managerial expertise; be decentralizable in its operational units, thus enabling establishments in rural com- munities; be in line with meeting the basic needs of the poorest people (in a given community where the technology is to be applied); and finally, be efficient, yet low-cost, and hence within the reach of the recipients--especially the poor peasants in most developing nations. 61 The Origins of, and Rationale for, the Development of Appropriate Technology There are at least three major reasons for the contemporary emphasis on the design, development, and dif- fusion of appropriate technologies. .t regarding Z. There has been di io , We? d te chr nologies. si illu "exogenous" and imr ort (b Cr.) Since the 19705, many scholars and policy makers have expressed concern over the dependence of the develop— ing countries on capital and energy-intensive technologies. Development programs based on the use of these technologies have had a limited effect on curbing food shortages, rising unemployment, and increasing absolute poverty in these countries. Widening income disparities between the "haves" and the "have nots" have also become a common feature in the Third World nation-states. Jequier (1976: 16) has summarized the negative effects (and thus the "inappropriateness") of these large-scale technologies in the following manner: They are usually costly relative to the in- come of the local populations, they require an educational and industrial infrastructure which takes decades to build up and their disruptive social consequences tend to be much more sudden than in their culture of origin. But perhaps most important of all, their introduction often in- hibits the growth of the indigenous innovative capabilities which are necessary if "development" is to take place. Therefore, it is quite evident that the new development climate would call for a re-direction of emphasis: a search for "appropriate" technologies that would recognize 62 the real needs, as well as the limitations of, the popu- lace and the environment in which the new technologies would be placed. 2. There have been rising concerns over the negative externalities and environmental degradation asso- ciated with the heavy reliance on large-scale, capital and energy-intensive technologies. The early model of development has been character- ized as a "growth-oriented" strategy that emphasized eco- nomic growth through industrialization and accompanying urbanization. Little or no attention was paid to the distributional effects that would result from growth. Similarly, little attention was paid to the environmental degradation or ecological imbalance that has often resulted from the excessive reliance on large-scale, capital, and energy-intensive technologies. It was erroneously argued that in the event of the on-set of any negative externalities, suitable technologies would be developed to counter-balance those adverse effects. Little did anyone realize that some of the resulting environmental damage or ecological destruction, once caused, would often prove extremely difficult, if not impossible, to reverse. For instance, one school of thought has strongly argued that the deser- tification and the associated drought conditions that now prevail in the northern half of Africa, including the Sahel regions, is due (in large part), to the ecological destruction of those areas of the world during the colonial era (Franke and Chasin, 1980). 63 But, according to Lodwick and Morrison (1980), the basic argument now seems to revolve around the relation- ships that exist between the level of economic development and the quality of life. While "growthists" or "capitalist- materialistic" development strategists appear to favor the enhancement of economic growth (misconstrued for national development) through massive industrialization, appropri- ate technology advocates assert that a point of diminish- ing, if not negative, returns may already have been reached (Morrison, 1978a—-see Figure III-2). It i1; within this vein that Jequier (1976:25) described the origin of appropriate technology: . . . the realization, shared by aid-giving and aid-receiving countries alike, that development aid and a Western style of industrialization have neither fulfilled the initial hopes which were placed in them nor been fully capable of solving the basic problems of development. Jequier (1976:26) has also argued that, even within the industrialized world, there has been a growing concern regarding the widespread acceptance of the early develop- ment model: . . . the worldwide student revolts of the 1960's, the debates about "Limits to Growth," the ecology craze and the oil panic, the reactions against the consumer society, and the patterns of living imposed by industrial necessity, are the most con- spicuous symptoms of Western society's growing doubts about its values, its way of life and its long term future. In light of the foregoing, it is therefore not surprising to note the increased efforts by scholars and policy— makers toward the design and initiation of alternative High Growthists Quality Appropriate Of Technologists Life Low Low High Level of Economic Development Figure III-2. Conflicting Growthist and Appropriate Technology Perspectives on the Relation- ship of Level of Economic Development and Quality of Life SOURCE: Morrison (1978a). development strategies. The new emphasis on the develop- ment of appropriate technologies is one of the products of such efforts. 3. The seminal work of E. F. Schumacher (1973) pro noted appropriate teehnoiogy thinking. Much of the early popularity of the appropriate technology concept can be traced to E. F. Schumacher's (1973) influential book: Small is Beaufitul: Economics as if People Mattered. The appropriate technology idea 65 has been advanced as a needed substitute for the "exogenous" large-scale,capital and energy-intensive technologies of the developed countries. It has been contended that these technologies failed to eliminate, or even reduce, poverty, inequality and unemployment in the developing nations. In a recent review of Schumacher's book, Alliband (1979:135) has noted Schumacher's strong opposition to the erroneous assumptions underlying the traditional Western economic development thinking-~the idea of placing too much emphasis on: . . . macro-level, rational decision-making with insufficient attention given to the human impacts of change. As an alternative, Schumacher (1973) has proposed a funda- mentally "humanistic change strategy" that would be aimed at the systematic study of more cost-effective ways of achieving acceptable societal goals with minimal means. Alliband (1979) has described this mode of thinking as "Buddhist economics"--essentially stressing the need for a close examination of change situations in order to determine socially suitable and acceptable goals and then find least wasteful ways of accomplishing them. The thrust of Schumacher's seminal work, according to Alliband (1979) is, therefore, the strong challenge of the underlying assumption of most orthodox economic thinkers--viz., that "competition and survival-of—the- fittest" are naturally inherited, immutable laws of human behavior. As a more feasible alternative, Schumacher 66 (1973) has proposed that the design, planning and execution of development programs should place maximum emphasis on dialogue and extensive consultation between planners and affected citizens. In the final analysis, Alliband (1979:136) observed that much of Schumacher's views are in harmony with the key elements and concepts of community development, since he: . . . advocates the principle of local autonomy, consumer participation in decision making, and the evolvement of local problem-solving capaci- ties . . . and need (for) less mass-production and more production for the masses. In this sense, Schumacher (1973) strongly favored the proliferation of small-scale and inexpensive work-places (such as labor-intensive cottage industries), in contrast to the introduction of large-scale, capital and energy— intensive factories. Consequently, the much needed employment opportunities would be provided to the masses in poor rural areas. Essential Principles of an Appropriate Technology for the Developing Countries Technology has been described as the "engine" for national development. It has also been asserted in Chapter II that appropriate development of the developing countries should have as its starting point the introduction of appropriate technologies for fostering agricultural pro- duction--the primary occupation of the large poor majority in most Third World nations. The early approaches to national development (notably, heavy industrialization and 67 the "top-down" approach to program design and implementa- tion) have not only failed to recognize the real needs of the poor but, more importantly, have stifled their initia- tiuxsand denied them an active involvement in the develop— ment process. Conversely, the achievement of national development through the introduction and use of appropriate technologies has been proposed as one way of correcting these ills. Hence. Morrison (l978bz5)aptly views appropriate technology as a new and popular: . . . social movement---a deliberate attempt to mobilize collective action to change society in a way that defies the institutionalized direction and/or rate and/or method of change in society. Wagner (1979:12) has proposed the following essential prin- ciples of appropriate technologies: 1. A technology can become appropriate when it is adaptable and location-specific. In other words, this principle recognizes the fact that different nation-states or socio-cultural sys- tems have different physical environments, as well as varying ways and means, of satisfying their basic needs for food, shelter and clothing. Therefore, a new technology or inno- vation has to be adapted to a specific local condition in order to be applicable. It has to be an improvement (in other words, "built upon") over the indigenous process/product that 68 is already there, and so show a definite relative advantage over this previous process/ product it is to replace before it can be acceptable to the target population. An appropriate technology has to be labor- intensive and capital saving. This principle arises out of the fact that capital has often been described as the most scarce production resource, whereas human labor frequently con- stitutes the most plentiful resource in most developing countries. Therefore, it makes sense that any new technology or innovation has to be designed in such a way as to make the best use of the most abundant production resource(s). A technology becomes appropriate if it is specifically designed for, and purposefully direct at, assisting the poor peasant majori- ties of the Third World in meeting their basic neegg. This principle stems from the fact that for these new technologies to be different and more beneficial to the populace, they should not only be aimed at decentralizing the means of production, but also be designed in such a way as to enhance primary production, utilizing local resources. They should also produce basically for the local markets. 69 In the light of the above principles, Morrison (l978b:7) has attempted to distill the "essence" of the appropriate technology critique of the large-scale, capital and energy- intensive technology in the following manner: Means of production that are capital-intensive, complex, large-scale, centralized, resource- intensive and resource-exogenous have undesir- able social impacts. They displace people, especially underdogs, from jobs, alienate the employed from their work and the unemployed from society, create over-abundance for a few while depriving the masses of their basic needs or at least make them dependent on others, create social units that are vulnerable to external events, are destructive of the environment, and are ultimately destructive of the affluence they seek to create. On the other side, soft (or appropriate) tech- nology productive systems that involve light capital, are small in scale, decentralized, resource conserving, and resource indigenous are appropriate because they have desirable social impacts. They create meaningful work for all, supply the basic needs of all, allow self-suffi- ciency and create an ecologically sustainable, higher quality of life. Key Dimensions of Appropriate Technology A useful discussion on the need to design appropri- ate technologies for the Third World nations cannot be com- plete without an extensive review of how the new technologies can effectively fit into, or harmonize, with the unique socio-cultural, economic, political and environmental realities of these countries. In other words, it can be asserted that an improved technology or innovation cannot be described as "appropriate" if the technology fails to satisfy the institutional, as well as the natural resource, requirements of the specified locality in which it is to 70 be introduced. Therefore, the key dimensions of an im- proved technology that have been considered to be in har- mony with the prevalent institutional and environmental conditions of the target population (namely, the Third World populace) in which it is to be used, will now be reviewed. The Socio-Cultural Dimensions of Appropriate Technology One of the key elements of the new development paradigm is the need to recognize the legitimate rights, as well as the real needs, of the large poor majority of the developing world through a participation-oriented strategy to national development. The new concept of development also calls for self-reliance in national devel- opment and the recognition of the cultural identities of all organized, geographically-identifiable human groups or nation-states. Foster (1973:10) has viewed a traditional society (a village or a small town) as an organized group of people who have learned to live and work together, and who inter- act and cooperate in the pursuit of common ends. In order to be able to live and work together harmoniously, a patterned arrangement of relationships (structure and organization) invariably evolves, through the development of formal rules and regulations,to guide everyday inter- course among members of the group. This becomes the culture of the specified human group. As Foster (1973:11) has 71 noted, culture can be more specifically thought of as: . . . the common, learned way of life shared by the members of a society, (and) consisting of the totality of tools, techniques, social insti- tutions, attitudes, beliefs, motivations, and systems of value known to the group. It is thus evident that a traditional society constitutes an identifiable human grogp or people; and their culture refers to the institutionalized behavior patterns that character» ize this human group. Foster (1973) has also identified the following basic characteristics of socio-cultural systems: 1. A socio-cultural system is a logically inte- grated, functional, sense-making whole-- (the totality of all socio-cultural systems within an identifiable geographic area com- prises a nation-state); 2. All socio-cultural systems are constantly changing--none is completely static; 3. Every culture has a value system; and 4. Cultural forms, and the behavior of individual members of a society stem from (or are func- tions of cognitive orientations) of deep-seated premises. But, the early model of development failed to recognize the existence of the above features about all human groups. Consequently, the early strategies for national development were mostly patterned on the values and experiences of the Western European and American nation-states. Misra (1981) 72 has observed that even the body of knowledge (primarily economics) on which these early development strategies were based relied almost exclusively on Western rationality and experiences. However, as previously noted, it became increas- ingly evident, beginning in the 19705, that national development could not be regarded as a neutral entity. Ventura (1981) has, therefore, suggested that technology (the "engine" for national development) must reflect the culture, environmental conditions, as well as the values and aspirations of the society for which it is designed to serve. The Inter-Cultural Transfer of New Technology Wagner (1979:12) has reported that the definition of "transfer" requires the existence and identification of a giver and a recipient (in other words, a "transferer" and a "transferee") and then an exchange or delivery of something from the former to the latter. However, avail- able evidence suggests that in the technology-transfer process the recipient component of the transaction is often poorly identified and also seldom actively involved in the technology assessment and selection process. As with the "top-down" approach to program design and develop- ment, there is oftentimes the erroneous tendency to assume that "somewhere out there" there are societies (or human groups) that are "anxiously waiting" to receive the new 73 technology. But, in order to demonstrate the immense need to encourage trans—sociocultural (or even international) dissemination of technology, Foster (1973:16) observed that even though inventors and discoverers can be found in every society, no human group (or nation-state) "would progress rapidly if change could come about ogly through the ingenuity of its own members." In other words, it is of absolute importance that change towards that which is upheld to be in the best interest of the populace (and is invariably in accord with the new concepts of national development) be encouraged from both "within" and "outside" the identified socio-cultural system. In further support of this perspective, Foster (1973:16) asserts: As far as a particular society is concerned, its proneness to advancement is the result of its members' exposure to the tools, techniques, and ideas of other groups, their readiness to recog- nize advantages in ways and forms not their own, and their opportunity to accept these ways and forms, should they wish to do so. Several scholars (Sauer, 1969; Vavilov, 1949) also appear to share this view. They strongly contend that the international, as well as the intercontinental, dissemin- ation of domesticated plants and animals, tools, and husbandry practices have constituted a major source of productivity growth in prehistory and in the classical civilizations. For instance, it has been noted that the transfer and adaptation of "new" crops (such as potatoes, maize, and tobacco) from the "new continents to Europe after the discovery of America had a dramatic impact on 74 European Agriculture" (Lawani, 1982z7). It has also been recorded that the technological bases for the production of certain export crops in most Third World countries (such as cocoa in Nigeria and Ghana) were the results of this same international transfer of adaptable crop varieties. It is remarkable that,unlike the early model of development, the new concepts of national development (including the new emphasis on appropriate technology approach) Strongly advocate the need for, and the impor- tance of, a systematic design and development (and subse- quently the introduction and adaptation) of new technol- ogies to local conditions. These new strategies for appropriate development also stress a "grass-roots," or "bottom-up,‘ approach to the design, planning and implementation of development programs. The needs, as well as the aspirations, of the populace or target population must now be recognized and fully considered; their active involvement in the identification of those felt needs and in the design and execution of programs to meet those needs must also be encouraged. The achievement of the above requires a thorough study and analysis of the organizational structure, pat- terns of relationships, and interactions of the identified target population. In other words, the uniqueness of the local culture, social values, needs and aspirations of this target population have to be fully appreciated and understood before an improvement in their quality of life 75 can be expected through the introduction of suitable technologies. The Socio-economic Dimensions of Appropriate Technology The advocates of massive industrialization through the importation of large-scale, capital and energy-inten- sive technologies have argued that it is one way of reducing the roles of human beings as "beasts of burden"--especially in the agricultural sector where human labor constitutes the primary source of power in most Third World nations. They have also contended that heavy industrialization and associated large-scale technologies are economic impera- tives for achieving rapid increases in growth and produc- tivity. Available evidence, however, indicates that this development strategy has failed to fulfil the expectations of planners and policy makers in the developing countries (Igbozurike, 1976). Mass poverty and deprivation have persisted, even worsened, in some places. Mass unemployment and associated inequity in income and distribution have caused considerable widening of the gap between the "haves" and the "have nots." Igbozurike (1976) also cited studies by Amin (1974) to indicate the increasing dependence of the developing nations on the advanced or industrialized countries. Acute food shortages have been witnessed and rising food import bills, coupled with capital expendi- ture (or depletion of meagre foreign exchange earnings) 76 on the importation of large-scale technologies, have led to a balance-of-payment deficit for most of the developing world. In the agricultural sector especially, many developing countries continue to witness sharp declines in domestic food production--despite massive government invest- ments on imported heavy machinery and other large-scale technologies. The individuals displaced by the automated, large-scale technologies have migrated to the cities-- wherethis rural-urban exodus has worsened the unemployment situation and urban congestion. For industrialized nations and multi—national corporations, the national development of the Third World nation-states has become reduced, or conveniently misconceived, to a simplified matter of merely marketing capital and energy-intensive technologies. From the foregoing, it has now become quite clear that national development involves more than merely mar- keting new, albeit inappropriate technologies. It unques- tionably involves the meeting of basic human needs. The new concept of development also calls for a recognition of the resource endowments, as well as the limitations of nation-states, upon which their development patterns or strategies are to be based. This is one of the unmistak- able justifications for the new emphasis on the appropriate technology development approach. This new approach calls for the concentration of efforts on the design and develop- ment of improved technologies affordable to the populace. 77 These technologies are not only expected to be resource- conserving (especially of the non-renewal or scarce resources), but should equally be labor-intensive technol- ogies--aimed at generating meaningful and profitable em- ployment opportunities for the populace. Recognizing the low literacy levels of the large poor majority in the developing countries, these technologies are also expected to be simple in nature, low-cost and easily comprehensible. According to McLaughlin (1976), some of the per- tinent socio-economic questions to ask in order to deter- mine the "appropriateness" of a new technology include: 1. Is the new technology or innovation within the financial means of the target population (i.e., the large poor majority in the develop- ing countries)? For instance, it is absurd to develop or attempt to introduce a $5,000 tractor-~or even a $1,000 tractor--to a farmer whose annual income is about $100.00; 2. Is the new technology easily understandable, and simple to operate, maintain, and even repair? 3. If the technology is in the form of an equip— ment or machinery, can it be manufactured locally, using local materials and workmanship? If it can be, then it may be assumed that it can achieve a fit into the local culture and production process; 78 4. If its use will generate more employment, more profit, or better service, has an eguit- able way of allocating those benefits been devised by, or through.the active participa- tion of the populace? 5. Is the new technology or system a relevant improvement on an item or method traditionally in use, rather than a totally new item extra— ngogs to the indigenous culture, values, or incentive system? 6. If use of the new technology or innovation will save time or lead to the displacement of some individuals, then what provisions have been made for the use of that time or the gen- eration of meaningful employment in other areas? If due consideration and adequate answers can be found to the questions and issues raised above, then one can reasonably expect that the socio-economic dimensions of the new technology are in accord with the socio-economic conditions of the target population. The Political Dimensions of Appropriate Technology Among the major elements of the early model of development is the idea of centralized, authoritarian planning and decision-making in which the populace (then regarded as merely passive, mostly illiterate, fatalistic 79 and conservative humans) were neither consulted nor encour- aged to participate. A "top-down" approach to "need" iden- tification, program design and implementation was the rule rather than the exception. A highly stratified organiza- tional structure, with hierarchical and mechanistic modes of management and control, was strongly upheld by the indig- enous, yet powerful, governmental ruling-elites. The early conceptualization of national development also placed ex— clusive emphasis on heavy industrialization, which clearly benefitted the privileged minority to a much higher extent, thereby widening the inequality and income gap between the rich and the poor. But, as has been observed by Jequier (1976:31), it has now become quite clear that large—scale technology is: . . . neither egalitarian nor socially neutral, and tends to accentuate the social and economic differences between the small minority which can profit or benefit from it as consumers or pro- ducers, and the vast majority of the population living at subsistence levels in the rural areas. Several scholars (Hunter, 1978; Ruttam, 1977) have also indicated that even well-meaning programs, such as the Green Revolution Technology (i.e., the spectacular increase in cereal-grain production through the development of quick- maturing and fertilizer responsive varieties of wheat and rice in the 19605), widened income disparities and did not benefit the small farmers as much as large land owners. Apart from the unfavorable institutional frameworks (such 80 as, relatively easy access to production inputs, credit facilities, and technical information from experts) which invariably favored the rich farmers and land owners, Hunter (1978:80) also noted that: . . the demanding exacting conditions of con- trolled water supply and drainage and high credit for chemical inputs, was not designed either for the economic conditions or the risk-capacity of the small farmers. But, in sharp contrast, the emphasis of the new concepts of development, as well as the appropriate tech- nology approach, is on decentralization of the means of production and the promotion of local initiative and self- reliance in development. The appropriate technology strategy also calls for a "grass-roots" or "bottom-up" approach to problem(s) and/or need(s) identification, pro- gram planning and implementation. It also advocates for the active involvement of the populace in the decision- making processes that are aimed at changing or improving their livelihood. According to Jequier (1976:36), what the proponents of appropriate technology are trying to accomplish is to "turn development into an autonomous process of innovation and growth from below." It is an endeavor designed to initiate the process of national development from "within" through the encouragement and stimulation of indigenous innovative capabilities that are already in existence in every community, village, and nation-state. The major focus of the new development paradigms is on the poor majorities in the Third World 81 nations whose welfare and livelihood have been largely ignored in the past. It seeks to stimulate the internal inventiveness and innovativeness of these neglected masses, as well as assist them in seeking the appropriate changes to improve their quality of life. In this regard, Jequier (1976:31) believes that appropriate technology might be viewed as: . . . a 'survival technology' for the hundreds of millions of (small) farmers who have been completely left out of the development process. It is, therefore, evident that appropriate technology tenets seek to restore the lost power,as well as a considerable degree of autonomy.to the masses. In this sense, their relevance and adequacy to the political realities in the Third World nation-states cannot be overemphasized. The Ecological Dimensions of Appropriate Technology The national development strategies of past years have been held largely responsible for the resulting dis— equilibrium in human-nature relationships or the ecological imbalance that are being witnessed in most Third World nations. Even the increasing pollution of air, land and sea--most conspicuous in the industrialized nations--have had adverse effects on human health, terrestrial and aquatic ecosystem (Morrison, 1978b). Little attention, if any, was paid to the long-term adverse effects on the environment of the indiscriminate and excessive dependence on the use of large-scale technologies for achieving growth 82 and productivity. It was merely assumed that environmental degradation was an inevitable component of the price to be paid by humans for the achievement of rapid increases in growth and productivity through industrialization (Morrison, 1978b). To make matters worse, it was also assumed that in the event of the on-set of any serious negative externali- ties, new technologies would be designed to combat them. Little did anyone realize that most environmental damage or ecological destruction, once caused, would prove to be irreversible. But, since the 19705, these notions are not only changing, but are now being seriously challenged. High priority is now being placed on the preservation and main- tenance of the quality of the natural environment. According to Nortey (1976), the populace, especially in the developed world, is justifiably alarmed at the in- creasing deterioration of the environment due, to a large extent, to the excessive dependence on large-scale and energy-intensive technologies. As an indication of the serious nature of environmental deterioration, Nortey (1976) has pointed out that the capacity of rivers, lakes and the atmosphere to absorb waste loads is being severely taxed. It is, therefore, not surprising to find the increasing concern and search among scholars and planners, for new or alternative ways for protecting the natural communities, preserving the scenery, providing clean air and water, and reducing noise and urban congestion (Nortey, 83 1976). Herein lies one rationale for the new emphasis on the design, development and diffusion of appropriate technologies for achieving development. In the light of the foregoing, Morrison (l978b:34) has remarked that: . . . fundamental to the appropriate technology conception (absolute or relative) is an emphasis on quality of life in comparison with the growthist emphasis on quantity of production and consumption. As previously indicated in Figure III-l, Morrison (1978b: 34) has clearly advanced that the appropriate technology notion is that, beyond some definite point, "less" (in terms of resource use, economic growth, etc.) actually means "more" in terms of quality of life. In contrast, however, the growthist or "capitalist-materialistic" notion contends that the "relationship of economic growth and quality of life is positive monotonic." Morrison (l978b:34) has further suggested that the issue at hand involves: Getting developed countries back on top of the knee of the curve and getting developing countries 3p on top of the knee. . . (but) the developing countries must eventually move from soft (appro- priate) technology to a mix of soft and hard technology if their welfare is ever to approxi- mate that of the developed countries (see Figure III-3). But it can be contended that the appropriate technology route to national development is being advocated as a solid foundation upon which to base other suitable development strategies. Quality of Life High Discretionary Need Satisfaction Moderate High Basic Need Satisfaction Low 84 H H Growthists Appropri- ate Tech- nologists ‘--—-—--—-———-———— Figure III-3. SOURCE: Low High —--d_——-———-—-———---———— Level of Economic Development Opposing Perspectives of the Growthists and Appropriate Technology Advocates on the Relationship of Level of Economic Development and Quality of Life Morrison (l978b). 85 Appropriate Technology for the Development of Small-scale Agriculture in the Third World A recent study by the World Bank (1981:50) pro- vided three major reasons why small holder agriculture should be the focus of more intensified development: 1. . . . although it accounts for the bulk of agricultural output in most African countries, its massive potential has yet to be realized: use of off-farm inputs (mostly improved tech- nologies) is still quite limited, yields are very low, and specialization is uncommon. 2. . . . recent studies (Lal and Collier, 1980; Lele, 1981) confirm what most of the litera- ture on African economies suggest-—that poverty on this continent, unlike in Latin America, is predominantly a rural phenomenon. Thus, raising the output and income of small farmers (through the introduction of appro- priate production technologies) is the best way to meet basic needs (in concert with the new conceptualization of national development). 3. Finally, attention to small holders is a more cost-effective way to raise output than other alternatives (such as large-scale mechanized agriculture) currently allow——at least for most crops and areas. 86 However, despite these observations, the decades of the 605 and 705 represented a period in African develop“ ment history when most countries (including Nigeria) strongly emphasized the development of large-scale, govern- ment-sponsored agricultural ventures. Most of the agricul- tural development schemes involved substantial capital out- lays for heavy mechanization and massive irrigation projects in some places. According to the World Bank (1981:51),it was then assumed that: . . . only a rapid transition (often referred to as the "transformation approach") to mechanized, high productivity schemes, as practiced in the industrialized world, would overcome the stagna- tion linked with the traditional low-input, low- output methods. Furthermore, it was also assumed that this approach would provide the much needed solution to the prevalent problems of seasonal labor shortages (at peak farming periods) or the drought conditions (especially serious in arid and semi-arid regions), that most of those countries were expe- riencing. It was also argued that, even though productivity was often lower on such large-scale government farms, their share of marketable surplus would likely be higher in the long run (World Bank, 1981). But available evidence now suggests that this development approach has failed to meet the expectations of most African governments; its contribution to growth having been found to be quite small, if not insignificant, when compared to the cost of those large-scale agricultural 87 schemes. According to the World Bank (1981:51), these large-scale capital and energy-intensive ventures were: . . . beset with problems of management over— employment of staff, under utilization of expensive machinery, and maintenance of equip— ment and infrastructure. But, contrary to the above findings, this same World Bank Report remarked that the rapid agricultural growth in Kenya strongly attests to the desirability of promoting small-scale agriculture. It has been reported that several favorable institutional rearrangements in the small holder sector (notably, the widespread land dis- tribution and settlement) resulted in significant increases in growth and productivity in this sector. According to the data provided by World Bank (1981:51), Kenya recorded a total agricultural production which increased at 4 per- cent per year from 1955-72. Perhaps more important was the finding that a "disproportionate amount of this growth came from small farmers" (World Bank, 1981). Equally im- portant was the observation that this remarkable growth in production was accomplished through the expansion of the production of hybrid maize (i.e.,an appropriate technology). From a comparative study of the adoption rates for hybrid maize, the World Bank (1981:51) also noted that the pro- duction of this crOp: . . . spread more quickly among Kenyan small holders between 1964-73 than it had among American farmers during the 19308. The Bank's Report further asserts: 88 . . . Kenya's experience shows that African small farmers are very responsive to opportunities for profitable innovation (i.e. they are responsive to appropriate technologies), and that small farms are frequently far more productive than large farms. It can, therefore, be contended that the development and introduction of hybrid maize (an appropriate technology) among the small farmers, who already benefitted from the land redistribution and settlement schemes, were largely responsible for the recorded outstanding increases in the total production of this staple food crop in Kenya. Several important lessons can also be learned from the Kenyan experience. First, it has been established that small farmers are not only responsive to new incentives, but are frequently quite willing to adopt and utilize im- proved technologies for enhancing production--provided that constraints to the successful adoption and utiliza- tion of such improved technologies are eliminated. In other words, a new or improved technology can only become "appropriate" if the relevant socio-cultural, economic, and institutional constraints that militate against its successful adoption are eliminated. This approach has been clearly demonstrated in the Kenyan situation where the impressive increase in total output was, in part, due to the new production on redistribution land-—a previously limiting socio-economic or institutional constraint. But, of higher significance, has been the increased production per hectare made possible by the development and dissemination 89 of new hybrid maize into the small holder farming system. This is an obvious case of a design and diffusion of an appropriate technology to small farmers who adopted the new technology because of its beneficial impacts. Besides, the relevant production constraint (inaccessibility to land) that could have limited their acceptance of the new technology was eliminated through the land redistribution and settlement schemes. Finally, in accordance with the tenets of the new paradigms of development (notably, the need to provide food and profitable employment) World Bank (1981:51) has observed that: . . small farms tended to have both higher output and higher employment per hectare than large farms. In the light of the foregoing, it can be argued that there is enough justification for advocating the con- centration of efforts on the development of small-scale agriculture in Nigeria. This development can be accom- plished through the design and diffusion of appropriate technologies for enhancing productivity, and subsequently, improving the welfare of the poor majority of small farmers in Nigeria. The "dualistic" character (i.e., large and small-scale farming systems) of the Nigerian agricultural sector and a typology of improved technol- ogies for fostering production especially in the small farms, will be discussed in the next chapter. Also, the most suitable strategies for the design, development, and diffusion of appropriate technologies to small farmers will be reviewed in Chapter IV. CHAPTER IV THE NATURE AND STRUCTURE OF NIGERIAN AGRICULTURE: IMPLICATIONS FOR THE DESIGN AND DIFFUSION OF APPROPRIATE TECHNOLOGIES FOR ENHANCING PRODUCTIVITY The Nigerian Agricultural Sector: Background Information The Federal Republic of Nigeria is located in a tropical environment between latitudes 40 and l4ON and longitudes 2° 20' and 14° 30's (Olaloku, et al. 1979). It is specifically located on the gulf of Guinea in the Western coast of Africa and extends northward from the coastline for about 1,046 kilometers. The country has a total land area of 98.3 million hectares; about 34 million hectares, or roughly one-third, constitutes land that is presently under cultivation. The total cultivable land in the country is, however, estimated at about 71.2 million hectares (Olaloku, et a1, 1979). In other words, less than half of the potential agricultural land in the country is presently being utilized. Given this fact, the authors of the Nigerian Third National Development Plan (1975-80) remarked: . . . not only does the country under-utilize its agricultural land in a quantitative sense, but the qualitative depreciation of most of the land under regular cultivation is even more apparent. 90 91 This qualitative depreciation of agricultural land has been held largely responsible for the characteristic low productivity of the Nigerian agriculture. The under-util- ization of land is also strongly believed to be a function of unresolved environmental, as well as institutional, constraints. For instance, it has been suggested that the utilization of unimproved production tools and techniques, especially by small holders who produce the bulk of the food needs of the country, may account for the low pro- ductivity of Nigerian agriculture [Third National Develop- ment Plan (1975-80). In addition, the prevalence of such institutional constraints (such as the existing land tenure system and the inaccessibility of small farmers to modern production inputs) have also been held responsible for the fragmentation of holdings and the difficulty of modernizing agricultural production in most parts of the country. The Nigerian agricultural sector is estimated to provide employment for about 70 percent of the country's working population--especially those residing in the rural areas. The two agricultural production systems that characterize the Nigerian situation are: l. agricultural enterprise carried out by smgll holders; and 2. agriculture conducted on large-scale commer- cial farms. Olayide (1976) has reported that about 95 percent of the 92 output of primary production in Nigeria occurs on small farms. But previous development efforts in Nigeria have largely ignored the needs and problems of the small pro- ducers, which include: production resource availability, poor farm yields, unimproved production technology, land- use limitations, a widening technological gap, and planning problems (Ebong, 1973; Olayide, 1976). As Olayide (1976:4) has remarked: The series of development programmes implemented (by the Nigerian governments) during the period (1960-75) failed to focus enough attention on solving these problems as they affect the small producers who supply well over 95.00 percent of the output of primary production. In the 1980's, however, increasing attention is being paid to the needs and production problems that con- front the small farmers in Nigeria. Therefore, in this chapter, the dualistic nature of the Nigerian agriculture [with special focus on the small-scale peasant farming system] will be extensively discussed. Then a typology of technologies for enhancing agricultural production under the existing farming systems in the country will be reviewed. Finally, the conceptual frameworks and strategies for the development of appropriate tech- nologies for the small holders in Nigeria will be con- sidered. The Dualistic Nature of Nigerian Agriculture The basic features of traditional agriculture, as practiced in Nigeria, do not differ significantly from 93 what prevails in many other developing countries of tropical Africa. Olatunbosun (1975:10) has characterized a typical Nigerian peasant farmer as: . . . usually a small holder, in most cases plant- ing an area of some 1.5-2 hectares, frequently divided into small and sometimes scattered plots. Olayemi (1976:25) also observed that agriculture in Nigeria is still practiced under a largely traditional system of cultivation whose characteristics include: Simple tools (hoe and cutlass) are used in tilling the soil. Farm inputs consist mainly of land and family labor. Capital investment is small and modern inputs like fertilizers, chemicals and improved seeds are still not widely used by farmers. It is also pertinent to note that the actual size of farm or land area cultivated by an individual farmer is often influenced by the population pressure on land (as well as the prevailing land tenure system). Thus, as shown in Table IV—l, it is evident that the area farmed by an indi- vidual farmer is generally smaller in the southern than in the northern part of Nigeria where the land-man ratio appears to be more favorable. Eicher and Baker (1982) also note that because family labor is the most important factor of production in the traditional small holder farm- ing system,and in light of the fact that most small farmers till their land with only human labor and hand tools, the area cultivated per farm family depends on the size and composition of the family labor force. It has been estimated that family labor inputs range from 80 to 94 TABLE IV-l PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION OF FARMERS ACCORDING TO SIZE OF FARMS IN NIGERIA, 1972 Size of Northern Nigeria Southern Nigeria Area Northern Western Eastern Farmed States States States (hectares) of Nigeria of Nigeria of Nigeria Under 0.10 1.9 4.7 20.5 0.10 under 0.20 5.5 8.5 19.8 0.40 under 1.01 27.7 35.6 27.1 1.01 under 2.02 27.5 23.0 6.7 2.02 under 4.05 19.0 10.4 1.1 4.05 under 10.12 7.0 3 1 0.2 10.12 under 20.23 0.4 -- -— Over 20.23 0.0 -- -- SOURCE: Federal Office of Statistics, Lagos (1973). 90 percent of total labor inputs in the traditional farming system (Byerlee, 1980). It has also been suggested that a typical Nigerian farming household generally comprises be— tween 6 to 10 family members. It is not uncommon for households to include more than one nuclear family. With respect to division of labor in the traditional farming system, Eicher and Baker (1982) have reported that adult male farmers work an average of 5 hours per day or 1,000 to 1,500 hours per year in farming activities. How- ever, a significant number of hours of labor is also devoted to off-farm activities, such as trading and small-scale industries. Although crop production appears to be the principal activity of most Nigerian traditional farmers, 95 it is important to recognize that they also devote a sig- nificant amount of their time to off-farm activities espe- cially during the dry season(s). Women also play an essen- tial role in farming, as well as in the processing and mar- keting of agricultural produce. But, as suggested by Eicher and Baker (1982), the extent of their participation may vary significantly by activity, ethnic group, and religion. Children also constitute a reliable source of farm labor for such tasks as weeding, bird scaring, and providing fodder for livestock. The Relevance of Small-Scale, Peasant Agriculture in Nigeria The small-scale peasant agriculture has also been variously described as the "subsistence," "primitive," and sometimes as the "traditional," or "indigenous" agricul- tural system. But, as with the semantics of Appropriate Technology, it is believed that the use of any of the above terms to describe this agricultural type largely depends on the area of emphasis and biases of the user. However, it may well be an erroneous assumption to assert that small-scale, peasant farms are "subsistence farms"-- ones that are removed from market forces. For example, Mellor (1966:134) has succinctly stated that: In general, peasant farms produce in excess of what the farm family chooses to consume and sell that surplus in the market in order to purchase nonfarm goods and services. The extent of this surplus varies among farms, regions, and nations and with size of farm, state of technology' and the degree of specialization in production. 96 Eicher and Baker (1982:48) have cited studies by Norman et a1.(l979) which found that 24 percent of the total value of small farm staple food production was marketed in Northern Nigeria. With regard to the use of the word "primitive" to describe this farming system, it is also noteworthy that several writers (Norman, 1980; Jodha, 1978) have recognized the usefulness and importance of some of the age-old farm- ing practices that are being carried out by small farmers in most developing countries. According to Norman (1980:2), there has been such new experiences as: . . increased realization, supported by empiri- cal evidence, that many traditional practices used by small farmers for generations are sound and should be preserved. In further support of this view, Schultz (1963:188) adds that: . . . paradoxical as it may seem, farmers in tradi- tional agriculture are generally more efficient by strict economic standards than farmers in the technically advanced countries in using the par- ticular collection of land, labor, and material reproducible capital that they each have at their disposal. In addition, many small farmers in Nigeria have benefitted from the use of such modern inputs as fertilizers and im- proved seeds. However, the use of a new technology has often been influenced by institutional constraints, such as the availability of the inputs (e.g. fertilizers) at the proper time and the accessibility to change agents, (i.e., government extension agents). With regard to the 97 latter constraint, it is common knowledge that agricul- tural extension field staff (often addressed as, "Agricul- tural Assistants" or AAs') in Nigeria are relatively i11- equipped for their jobs (in terms of training and practical experience). Further credence for this belief was pro- vided by the findings of an evaluative study of the Nigerian agricultural extension education system conducted by Axinn and Thorat (1972). The existence of a consider- able "social distance" between extension agents in Nigeria and their target population (comprising mostly of the rural small farmers and their families) has also been established. For example, Axinn (1981) has defined "social distance" in terms of differences in language, education, economic level, age, and family status. He further observed that the effectiveness of an individual change agent involved in an extension education program tends to vary inversely with the social distance between this change agent and the members of the target population. However, Okigbo (1981:41) has described the Nigerian traditional farming pattern and the associated bush fallow system as a "stable, ecologically sound and efficient farming and land use systems." But, as a result of the increasing population pressure on land and the com- mercialization of production, the bush fallow periods have been reduced drastically, with such consequences as: 98 . . loss of soil organic matter and top soil through erosion, deterioration of the physical characteristics and nutrient status of the soil, changes in number and composition of soil microflora, and multiplication of pests and diseases and rampant weed growth (Okigbo, 1981:41). These enormous production problems have not only lowered yields and aggregate production on the small farms but, more importantly, have called for the injection (design and introduction) of new and appropriate technologies into this farming system. This contention appears to have been supported by Mellor (1966:134), who has observed that: . . . Peasant agriculture tends to be character- ized by low levels of utilization of certain resources, low levels of productivity, and rela- tively high levels of efficiency in combining resources and enterprises . . . Collectively they suggest little scope for rapidly increasing either total production or productivity per unit of the resources within the context of a tradi- tional agriculture, but very great scope for in- creasing total production and resource productivity through technological change. In further support of this reasoning, it has been suggested that "low pay-off" approaches be avoided and "high pay-off" approaches be encouraged. Shultz (1963:189) has explained that these high pay-off approaches predomin- antly involve "improvements in the quality of agricultural inputs." They range from such improved inputs as: com- mercial fertilizer, insecticides, tools and equipment and the development of genetically superior plants and animals. In other words, Shultz (1963:188) maintains that agricul- tural development programs that are merely designed to in- duce traditional farmers to increase their investment in: 99 . . precisely the same type of agricultural factors that they have been using for genera- tions will fail for lack of acceptance, simply because the pay-off is too low. It is, therefore, advanced that the development of small farms through the infusion of appropriate technologies, is a sine qua non for fostering agricultural production in Nigeria. The Place of Large-scale, Commercialized Agriculture in Nigeria In contrast to small-scale peasant farms, large- scale commercialized farms in Nigeria are characterized by the use of massive, capital and energy-intensive technolo- gies. This farming system has also been variously described as the "state farms," or "plantation" type of agricultural production pattern. It is Operated, although on a limited scale, as mostly a governmental, but sometimes as a pri- vate venture or enterprise. Eicher and Baker (1982:50) have cited studies by Saylor and Eicher (1970) which suggest that government plantations in Nigeria are generally found to be unprofitable ventures because of such limitations as: . . . lack of technical data, poor management, and high turnover in unskilled labor (frequently 100 percent year year), etc. Johnson (1968) also found that, even though the number of privately operated plantations in Nigeria appeared to have increased during the 1951-65 period, government marketing board taxes on plantation cash crops (such as oil palm and rubber) reduced the rate of return on these plantations to 100 nearly zero by the early 605. However, Whyte (1981:1) reported that these large- scale commercial farms were basically patterned after the European colonial "plantation model" in which research efforts were mainly concentrated on "production of crops for export--and particularly for export to the mother country." Whyte (1981) has further suggested that this plantation model, as well as other classical strategies of agricultural research and development, were primarily de- signed for the benefit and needs of the industrialized nations. The large-scale plantations or state farms were established in the former colonies for the specific task of producing export crops (notably, cocoa, oil palm and rubber) and other agricultural raw materials needed for the indus- trialization of the Western European countries. As shown in Figure IV-l, the structure of the Euro- pean colonial model is distinctly "vertical" in orienta— tion. It has also been described as a mechanical and hierarchical model that is essentially based on a "top- down" approach to program design, planning, and implemen- tation. In other words, this model is not only central- ized and authoritarian in nature and operation, but has also been ladened with immense red-tape and bureaucracy. Whyte (1981) has also noted that, in this system, agricul- tural research is exclusively carried out in the labora- tories. Research results, as well as other technical data, are then transmitted "down" to the plantations, where 101 Scientific Research Center (where single technical dis- cipline-oriented research develops new technology) -—--——--> \/ Staff (extension) _______..__-_9 V/ Plantation or Field Operations (intended clientele accepts new technology) The solid lines indicate a high frequency of communication. The broken lines show a rela- tively low frequency or feedback. Figure IV-l. The "Vertical" or "Top-Down" Model of Agricultural Research and Development SOURCE: Adapted from Whyte (1981). 102 production is closely supervised and controlled. Feedback, which is seldomly encouraged, is then taken "upwards" to the researcher who basically controls, as well as deter- mines, the research priorities and needs. The paternalistic tendency of the approach, notwithstanding, it is also evi- dent that under the colonial system,the development of in— digenous initiatives and skills is rarely encouraged. Nevertheless, Singh (1976) observed that as a result of continuous and sustained scientific research in the system, new technologies--which lead to higher produc- tivity and returns to the use of some resources on the large-scale, commercialized farms--were often developed. Whyte (1981:1) has also reported that the plantations can be characterized as ones that: . . . developed a high degree of productivity and efficiency, based on thorough farm management backed up by high quality research in the plant soiences. But, in view of the new conceptualization of national development, which--among other things—-has stressed the need for self-reliance in development, as well as a partic— ipatory approach to program planning and implementation, it is evident that the colonial agricultural development model is an anachronism. Furthermore, recognizing the poor bargaining power of small farmers in Nigeria, who are often stereotypically dismissed as "passive" and "conservative" or "primitive" producers, the unsuitability of the European colonial model for addressing their production needs and 103 problems cannot be overemphasized. Besides, the classical model was never designed for, or aimed at solving, the food production problems confronting these small holders. Whyte (1981:1) has reported that, until shortly before the end of the colonial administration, agricultural research largely concentrated on export crops, and conse- quently: . . . provided little or no technical assistance to the small farmers who were raising crops for home consumption and for local marketing. Okigbo (1976) has also observed that the "plantation-type" agriculture has not only been capital and energy-intensive but,more importantly, has never been "based on existing institutions." In addition, the World Bank (1981:51) has reported that several of the major problems and difficul- ties that have militated against the successful operation of large-scale commercialized agriculture in Nigeria include: . . . problems of management, overemployment of staff, under—utilization of expensive machinery, and maintenance of equipment and infrastructure. To this list may be added the assertion that the con- tribution of large-scale farms to aggregate food production and provision of profitable employment for the populace, has been quite small, when compared to the cost of their establishment. It is also pertinent to indicate that, although the Nigerian governments prefer not to publicize the failures of many government-sponsored large-scale farming schemes, Eicher and Baker (1982:52) have reported that there is enough information to conclude that: 104 . . . large-scale/capital-intensive food produc- tion complexes cannot compete with (Nigerian) small holders for meeting staple food needs in the 19805. Furthermore, the World Bank (1981:53) has reported that Nigeria is aiming at "plowing" part of her mineral oil wealth back to the rural areas, and consequently: . . . does not attach great importance to cost recovery and a financially self-sustaining agri- cultural sector. But it can be argued that this approach has often led to gross mismanagement of project(s) as well as to the dis- couragement of evaluative studies of such large-scale agricultural schemes. In addition, there is a paucity of relevant quantitative data on the performance of most agricultural projects in Nigeria. Small-scale Versus Large-scale Agriculture in Nigeria: Implications for the New Emphasis on Development of the Former The continuing controversy over the rationale and profitability of assisting small holders versus promoting the development of large-scale farms (including plantations, state farms, and river basin development schemes) has been described as the "improvement" versus the "transformation" approach to agricultural development (Eicher and Baker, 1982). The transformation approach has been characterized by the develOpment of a wide variety of large-scale farming and processing technology. Eicher and Baker (1982: 47) have observed that this approach has been essentially designed to "bypass the lengthy process of improving small 105 farms within the existing village structure." As previously indicated, the major ingredients of the transformation strategy include: . . . infusion of capital-intensive technologies, such as tractor mechanization, central management (often European), and mobilization and training of an unskilled labor force by removing people from their villages (Eicher and Baker, 1982:47). The improvement strategy, on the other hand, includes the provision of appropriate technologies to small farmers and their farm families at affordable rates. These technol- ogies may range from subsidized fertilizer, pesticides, and irrigation facilities, to the provision of credit and farmer training centers-—inc1uding the development of an effective extension service system. Both the transformation (large-scale) and improve- ment (small-scale) strategies were advanced by governments of different regions of Nigeria in the 6OS--soon after the country gained political independence from the British gov- ernment. Eicher and Baker (1982:50) observe: . . . During Nigeria's first Development Plan (1962-68), the three regions in the southern part of the country (Western, mid-Western, and Eastern) devoted some 70 percent of their capital and re- current budgets in agriculture to the transforma- tion approach (farm settlements, school leaver farms, and plantations). On the other hand, the Northern region pursued an improvement strategy during the 1962-68 plan to help small farms through subsidized fertilizer, credit, and farmer training centers. Advocates of the transformation approach not only believed that large farms would benefit from economies—of-scale, but also assumed that it was the best strategy for 106 "bringing rapid development to the people,’ as well as meeting the political urgency of "getting on with develop- ment" (Eicher and Baker, 1982). In addition, it was also falsely assumed that such large schemes would provide rural employment for the increasing numbers of young school-leavers. Little attempt was made by the proponents of the transformation approach to bring to focus the fact that most advanced economies of the world did not neces- sarily achieve their present state-of-the-art via this route. In other words, available evidence suggests that the present large—scale, capital-intensive and labor- saving agricultural enterprises of industrialized nations appear to have reached the technologically advanced levels through an "improvement" process. It was gradual, but systematic--often dictated by changes in resource condi- tions and endowments, such as availability and cost of factors of production (including labor and land). An equally underlying' elemenmsof this advancement has been the indigenous Ibreakthroughs in research and development of new and improved products, processes, and more effective ways of solving human problems. But, while success stories of large-scale agricul- ture during the colonial period in Africa (such as the renowned Gezira scheme in the Sudan, and the tea planta- tions in East Africa) have often been offered as examples of the superiority of the transformation approach, Eicher and Baker (1982:49) have cited analytical studies from 107 several scholars (Baldwin, 1957; Lewis, 1964; Chambers, 1969; and FAQ. 1976) to support their contention that pro- ponents of large-scale agriculture have: . . often overlooked or glossed over the hor- rendous failures of large-scale schemes such as the East African groundnut scheme introduced by the British colonial service in Tanganyika (now Tanzania) after World War II, the failure of Mokwa settlement scheme in Northern Nigeria . . . and the mixed results with land settle- ment schemes and state farms in Africa and throughout the world. Eicher and Baker (1982:51) have also cited a detailed analysis of the Western Nigeria's settlement schemes by Roider (1971) which found: . . . that after six years of operation, the gov- ernment had spent $11,200 per settler, or double the amount originally projected, while yields ranged from 25 percent (cotton) to 65 percent (rice) of the yields estimated in the feasibility study. Similar analytical studies (e.g., Saylor and Eicher, 1970; Johnson, 1968; Andreou, 1981) found that, by the end of the '605, both government and private large-scale agricultural projects have proved to be unprofitable ventures in Nigeria. Among the major reasons advanced for the dismal failure of the transformation approach in Nigeria include: Lack of technical data, superficial planning, poor management, high turnover in unskilled labor (frequently 100 percent per year), over- investment in housing and social services, in- appropriate mechanical technology, and lack of participation by settlers (Eicher and Baker, 1982). To this list may be added the contention that most govern- ment-sponsored, large-scale agricultural projects are often 108 ill-located or wrongly sited for political reasons. This is in contrast to the need to determine the suitability of a project site on the basis of a comprehensive review of the relevant bio-physical and socio-economic criteria required for meeting the needs of the populace. In the light of the foregoing, it is evident that empirical data do not appear to support the transformation approach as the appropriate route to agricultural develop- ment in Nigeria. According to Eicher and Baker (1982), the reports of failures of many large-scale farming schemes throughout Sub—Saharan Africa have amply suggested that large-sca1e/capital—intensive food production complexes cannot effectively compete with African small holders for meeting the staple food needs of the 803. The answer must, therefore, be found in the development of small—scale farms through the infusion of appropriate production technologies for use by small farmers to enhance productivity. Further— more, Eicher and Baker (1982:51) have cited studies by Eicher and Johnson (1970) who evaluated the consequences of pursuing transformation versus the improvement strategies in Nigeria, and concluded: . . . small holder improvement programs rather than land settlements or plantations should form the backbone of Nigeria's agricultural strategy over the 1969-85 period. Wells (1974) has also made similar observations about the Nigerian agricultural development pattern during the First Plan period (1962—68). It is, therefore, contended that 109 the various governments in Nigeria (states, as well as federal ministries of agriculture) must design policies and initiate structures that encourage the development of small- scale agriculture in the country. The strategies for the accomplishment of this task will be reviewed in this study. Also the policy implications as well as recommendations based on the above findings and observations will be dis- cussed in Chapter V. The Need for a New Approach to Agricultural Development in Nigeria: Design of Appropriate Technologies for Small Farmers It is widely recognized that the organizational frameworks for agricultural research and development, which have evolved over the past century, appear to have worked reasonably well for the industrialized nations. But re- searchers and development scholars are beginning to realize that this development approach (especially the transforma- tion--capita1 and energy intensive, route) has not worked and is not likely to work as well in the developing countries. Aside from the glaring differences in the socio- economic, cultural, political and environmental conditions between the industrialized and most developing nations, the empirical evidence arising from the failure of agri- cultural development projects based on this approach attest to this fact. Thksnew awareness has, therefore, prompted the search for alternative agricultural development strate- gies that are especially designed for improving the 110 productivity and, subsequently, the welfare of the millions of small farmers who constitute the rural poor majority in most developing countries. Several reasons have also been advanced to account for this new awareness regarding the well-being of the small farmers in Nigeria, as well as in other developing countries. First, the new paradigms of national develop- ment have clearly stressed the need for improving the welfare and standard of living of the poor. In other words, the basic needs requirements, as well as the par- ticipatory approach to program design and implementation, are just two of the new elements of development that implicitly call for a repudiation of the old strategies of agricultural development. Then, as previously indi- cated in this study, available evidence suggests that small.holders produce the bulk of the food needs of the populations in most developing countries. But, as Whyte (1981) has observed, most existing agricultural research and development strategies-~often specifically designed for advanced economies--have not given much consideration and attention to the needs and problems of these small farmers. For instance, even such well-meaning and highly acclaimed new technologies as the "Green Revolution"--the plant breeding breakthroughs of the '605 that led to the production of new high-yielding cereal grain varieties-- tended to "favor those large producers already in rela- tively advantageous positions and did much less to improve 111 the lot of the rural majority . . ." (Whyte, 1981:VII). But,in contrast, Whyte (1981:VII) has also cited studies that were sponsored by the International Rice Research Institute: . . . where small farmers were cultivating irri- gated land, they tended to adOpt the new tech- nology (viz: the cultivation of Green Revolution cereal grains) about as rapidly as the larger farmers and to reap substantial benefits. In- deed, their more intensive use of labor produced higher yields per acre than on large, less intensively cultivated farms. In the light of the foregoing, therefore, several needs become relevant. These include the need to: l. abandon the transformation (large-scale) route to agricultural development in Nigeria, and embrace the improvement (small-scale) strategies; 2. provide the required production complements that the small farmers do not already possess --which will enable them to not only adopt new and improved (appropriate) technologies, but also to benefit from such adoption; and 3. design new strategies and programs of agri- cultural development that have the concerns, needs and production problems of small farmers as a central focus. In due recognition of the above needs, the "requirement- limitations gap" mode1--as advanced by Swanberg (1980) as well as the farming systems research approach-~as reported 112 by Norman (1980), have emerged. These approaches will now be discussed. Models and Strategies for the Design and Introduction of Appropriate Tech— nologies for Small-scale Farmers Swanberg's "Requirements-Limitations Gap" Model As indicated elsewhere in this study, the "vertical" or "trickle-down" strategy of technology development and dissemination assumes that: . . if a better idea (say, an agricultural inno- vation) is discovered, the masses will immediately accept it (Woods, 1977). This strategy does not appear to recognize the need for "tapping" the wealth of knowledge and experience gained by traditional farmers through generations of practical farm- ing. Thus, the vertical approach ignores the need to con- sult with, or encourage the active participation of, pea- sant farmers in research efforts aimed at designing new production technologies for their use. Because of the non- participatory nature of the "trickle down" strategy, it can also be argued that the new technologies designed through that approach must be significantly different or exogenous to the existing traditional or indigenous produc- tion systems. In other words, the resulting technologies are not likely to have been "built upon" what is already in existence. If new technologies do not represent an improvement on what is already available, their compat- ibility is questionable. Zaltman and Duncan (1977:14) have 113 defined compatibility in terms of the "goodness of fit" an innovation must have with the situation in which it is to be used. They contend that an innovation (or any change for that matter) must be as consistent as possible with such things as: . . . group (target population's) values and beliefs . . . the other machinery with which the new equipment must be used, the type of soil available for agricultural and animal feeding purposes, literacy levels, the past history of change in an organization, and so forth. It is, perhaps, in due recognition of the short- comings of the "trickle-down" strategy and an appreciation of the need for compatibility, that Swanberg (1980) advanced the "requirements-limitations gap" model. Swanberg (1980) has proposed that an improved technology has to be adjusted to the small farmers' reality or production environment [X] before it can be meaningful and acceptable to them. In other words, although new technologies are typically designed at the research stations where field trials are conventionally conducted (see Points #1, 2, and 3 in Figure IV—2), the existence of environmental barriers (Points #4, 5, 6) makes it imperative that further trials be carried out on the small farmers' fields and that neces- sary adjustments and on-farm adaptations be made (Points #6, 7). According to Swanberg (1980), the adjustment pro- cess or on-farm adaptation of the new technology will 114 ' Pure or Basic Applied Research < Research (1) (2) (, Development of New Technology (Agricultural Innovation) (3) \V E N v I N M ataxia L B $N1R.I E R 5 Existing Socio-cultural Existing Institutional Prevalent Bio-physical and and and Economic Structures Political Relationships Ecological Conditionqu (4) (5) (6) I 5 i I I i I Small Farmers' Reality and : Production Environment ' / [x1 If ‘(v ' \L” 5533:3222.“ or 5:92;: 2;: of New Technology to p y ' > . . <———————i ' “Economic Local Conditions Ecological Limitations (7) Limitations (Lsc-e) (10) ,/ ,, ‘\ (pr-e) (ll) -i.._‘-_.- _ _ \\ ./ \ . // \ 1 Changes in the Specific Socio- Specific Bio- Changes in the ! Socio-cultural and cultural and physical and Bio-physical and | Economic Require- Economic Ecological Ecological Re- ’ ments and/or Requirements Requirements quirements and/or Limitations (Rsc-e) (Rbp-e) Limitations (15) (8) (9) (16) I)? I /\ I v (12) //. ‘\\< . um , R C C Lsc-e Rbp-e pr-e Rsc-e (14) Extension to Small Farmers Figure IV-2. Bridging the Requirements--Limitations Gap by Constraint Reduction SOURCE: Adapted from Swanberg (1980). 115 determine the full set of resource reguirements (Points #8, 9) which the agricultural innovation presents to the small farmers. Thereafter, an in-depth analysis of the small farmers' production environment will clearly reveal the structural and resource limitations (Points #10, 11) that they confront, thereby militating against their beneficial use of the new technology. Therefore, an inventory and careful study of the production resources available to these small producers, as well as the nature of the insti- tutions serving them, must be carried out at this stage. After a thorough identification of the full set of resource requirements and production limitations, a test for closure (Points #12, 13) can then be carried out. This is clearly the stage for "bridging the gap" between the new demands imposed by the improved technology and the production con- straints facing the small farmers. Swanberg (l980:4) has reported that a test for closure can be carried out in the following manner: . . . if the set of requirements (Rsc-e and Rbp-e) fall within the set of limitations (Lsc-e and pr-e), the new package of activities can be passed on to the delivery (extension) system (Point #14). If the requirements are greater than the limitations, a constraint arises, and an adjustment must be made. Swanberg (1980) has further noted that the presence of a production constraint is implicated when the new technology is not "adopted" by small farmers. At this juncture, it is suggested that an analysis of the adOption rate patterns among the target population may serve to uncover the 116 "binding constraint." Furthermore, Swanberg (1980:4) cited two recommendations advanced by Zandstra et a1.(l979) regarding how constraint reduction can be effectively accom- plished: 1. The "submissive" approach to technology development-—which advocates changes (Points #15, 16) through the reduction of the levels of resource requirements demanded by the im— proved technology (perhaps, through further research efforts and refinements). The primary objective here is to ensure that resource requirements fall completely within, or "harmonize" with, the environmental limitations, so that no constraints arise. The "interventionist" strategy-~which advo- cates changes (Points #15, 16) through the develOpment of: "buffer institutions to expand the farmers' resources, their limita- tions, so that a given level of incremental requirements will fall within the expanded limitations." Swanberg (l980:5) further observed that "if such adjustments can be made, no constraints will be encountered, and the improved technologies can then be classi- fied as 'appropriate' and passed over to the delivery system for introduction to the farmers." 117 Strengths and Shortcomings of Swanberg's Model At the conceptual level, it must be admitted that Swanberg's model appears to have provided a broad-based organizational framework--a framework upon which various disciplinary studies addressing the multi-dimensional production problems facing small farmers can be designed. This model may be especially useful, for example, in agronomic studies dealing specifically with the develop- ment and diffusion of an improved seed variety among an identified target population. The "requirements— limitations gap" model can be effectively utilized by a single researcher whose study conditions may necessitate that an identified agronomic (or cultivation) problem facing small producers be handled by him/her single- handedly or in isolation from other researchers. But, in contrast, the farming systems research (FSR) approach, which takes a holistic view of the complex production problems confronting small producers, stresses the need for multi-disciplinary research focused on all facets of those complex on-farm problems. It is further suggested that it is on the basis of these multi-disciplinary on-farm studies that appropriate technologies for small holders can be developed. In addition, while the Swanberg model implicitly recognizes the key roles played by small farmers with respect to staple food production in the developing countries, the FSR approach expressly recognizes this 118 factor as a major rationale for the increased research attention to the needs and production problems confronting small farmers. More importantly, however, the FSR approach recognizes the vital need to "tap" the wealth of knowledge and experience accumulated by small-scale, traditional farmers through generations of practical farming. Thus, unlike the Swanberg's approach, farming systems research practitioners strongly advocate a "participatory approach" to the design and development of appropriate technologies for the identified target population. Through active citizen involvement, it is ensured that new technologies will inevitably "build upon" the target population's knowledge and experience. This may constitute one way of ensuring that the new technologies are appropriate. The Farming Systems Research (FSR) Approach As discussed in Chapter 2, among the dominant characteristics of the new conceptualization of national development include the emphasis on the provision of "basic human needs" as well as the concern for "growth with equity and distribution." Both characteristics clearly recog- nize the urgent need to channel development resources and programs toward a definite target population—~the poor and underprivileged in the developing countries-—most especially the small farmers who constitute the largely neglected rural 119 poor majority. The increasing concern for the welfare of these poor masses has, therefore, precipitated the design of new development strategies aimed at enhancing the income-earning opportunities of this segment of the popula- tion. But rather than taking a "welfare approach," the new development strategies, among other things, aim at "pro- viding small farmers with relevant and improved technology to meet their needs" (Norman, 1980:1). This is regarded as one of the crucial ways of helping to increase the income- earning Opportunities of the small producers. It is, therefore, in association with the quest for an appropriate means of providing relevant production technologies to the small farmers that the farming systems research (FSR) approach has emerged (Norman, 1980). Origins of Farming Systems Research There is an ever increasing recognition by several scholars (Jodha, 1978; Navarro, 1977) that many traditional agricultural production practices, which have been used for many generations by small farmers in the developing countries, are "sound and should be preserved" (Norman, 1980:2). On the basis of this realization, Whyte (1981: 38) has also reported that scholars have, therefore, begun to abandon the "myth of the passive peasant," through the obvious recognition of the following fact: 120 . . . that 20 to 40 years or more of experience in farming in a given area has given the farmer an intimate practical knowledge of behavior of plants and animals in that area under varying conditions, and that furthermore the agricul- tural scientist needs to gain access to the information and ideas of the small farmer if he (or she) is to be able to make any useful contribution to that farmer and his (or her) farm. Therefore, the need for researchers to not only analyze the totality of the small farm production environment, but, more importantly, to comprehend it before exploring various ways to improve upon it, cannot be overempha- sized. This is the thrust of the farming systems research approach. Another immediate origin of the farming systems research is the increasing realization by scholars and researchers that previous agricultural development strate- gies have not only failed to improve the likelihood of small farmers; they have often led to an unequal distribu- tion of benefits. For instance, Whyte (1981) has observed that both the "trickle-down" strategy of technology devel- opment and dissemination, as well as the "transfer of technology" approach to technology generation, have all erroneously assumed that the benefits of research and development will ultimately reach the small farmers, whose needs and problems have never been recognized. In addi- tion, Norman (1980:2) has cited studies by some scholars 121 (Khan, 1978: Poleman and Freebairn, 1973) to indicate the following findings: Despite claims that Green Revolution technologies were intrinsically neutral to scale, for instance, many small farmers and the landless found it diffi- cult to gain access to land and the technological packages. Therefore, the farming systems research approach has evolved as one means of ensuring that improved technologies are specifically designed to meet the production needs or address the field problems faced by small farmers. The farming systems research also appears to have originated from the realization by scholars and researchers that the "wealth of knowledge" which has been gained by small farmers is not merely based on the "accumulation of experience, handed down from generation to generation" (Whyte, 1981:38). In order to support the view that tradi- tional farmers also engage in, and often carry out, their own indigenous experimentation, Whyte (1981:38) cited the following findings by Howes and Chambers (1979) about a local (traditional) farmer in Nigeria: . . . a scientist believed he had made a break- through when he found a way of breeding yams from seed, propagation normally being vegetative. A farmer was casually encountered, however, who had not only himself succeeded in doing this, but had also discovered that whereas the first gen- eration tubers were abnormally small, the second and subsequent generations were of normal size. The scientist reportedly exclaimed, "Thank God these farmers don't write scientific papers." On the basis of the above, Whyte (1981:35) has drawn the following conclusions: 122 The stereotyped view of the tradition-bound passive peasant contrasted with the rational agricultural scientist falls apart as we see small farmers making choices based upon obser- vation and experimentation while agricultural scientists often seek to impose upon them the "traditional" style of farming characteristic of the Iowa corn belt. Therefore, it is this continuing realization of the "peasant rationality," along with the other reasons discussed above, that has contributed to the emergence of the "grass—roots" or "bottom-up" farming systems research approach to the design and development of small farmer technology. The full meaning of this new research approach, as well as its essential characteristics, will now be explored. Objectives and Characteristis of the Farming Systems Research Approach A system has been generally conceptualized as any set of interrelated and interacting elements or components. On this basis, a farming system is viewed as consisting of a complex interaction of a number of interdependent com- ponents (Norman, 1980). In the world of small farmers, both the farm production enterprises and household deci- sions are often intimately connected. Therefore, Norman (1980:2) has proposed the following conceptualization of a typical small-scale farming system: . . . a specific farming system arises from the decisions taken by a small farmer or farming family with respect to allocating different quan- tities and qualities of land, labor, capital, and management to crop, livestock, and off-farm enterprises in a manner which, given the knowledge the household posses, will maximize the attainment of the family goals(s). 123 Okigbo (1981:45) also viewed farming systems research as essentially involving: . . . studies of systems components and develop- ment of principles, materials, techniques and practices, some of which may be of general appli- cation, but others are location-specific. Furthermore, in a description of the tasks of the Inter- national Institute of TrOpical Agriculture (IITA) in Nigeria, Okigbo (1981:41-45) has reported that their farm- ing systems research program is aimed at accomplishing the following: . . . gives priority to development of appropriate technologies involving mechanical, chemical and biological resource manipulations that are within the means of the small farmer to own, use, and re— pair or even hire . . . farm-level studies of existing farming systems are aimed at understanding the farmer's overall environment, farm enterprise, and constraints to increased productivity, all of which facilitate determining priorities and strategies. It is, therefore, evident that the primary objec- tive of the farming systems research approach is to study and analyze the entire production environment (including the resources, constraints and limitations) in an attempt to devise the means to enhance its overall efficiency. Norman (l980:5) also viewed this research approach as a developing technology that is aimed at: . . . increasing productivity in a way that is useful and acceptable to the farming family, given its goal(s), resources, and constraints. Shaner et al.(l982:4) have summarized the objec- tives of, as well as the developmental activities that are 124 carried out under, farming systems research as being: . . . (small) farmer-based, problem solving, comprehensive, interdisciplinary, complementary, iterative, dynamic, and responsible to society. Accordingly, they content that the approach can be charac- terized as: 1. farmer-based —- because FSR & D (farming systems research and development) teams pay attention to farmers' conditions and inte- grate farmers into the research and develop- ment process; problem solving -- in that FSR & D teams seek researchable problems and opportunities to guide research and to identify ways for making local services and national policies more attuned to the farmers' needs; comprehensive -- in that FSR & D teams con- sider the whole farming activity (consumption as well as production) to learn how to improve the farmers' output and welfare, to identify the flexibilities for change in the environ- ment, and to evaluate the results in terms of both farmers' and society's interests; interdisciplinary -- in that researchers and extension staff with different disciplinary backgrounds work with farmers in identifying problems and opportunities, searching for solu- tions, and implementing the results; 125 5. complementary -- because it offers a means for using the outputs of other research and devel- opment organizations and for giving direction to others' work; 6. iterative -- in that FSR & D teams use the results from research to improve their under- standing of the system and to design subsequent research and implementation approaches; 7. dynamic -- in that oftentimes FSR & D teams introduce relatively modest changes in the farmers' conditions first and the favorable results encourage more significant changes later; and 8. responsible to society -- in that FSR & D teams keep long-run interests of the general public in mind, as well as the farming groups immediately affected (Shaner, et a1, l982:4). The Modus Operandi of Farming Systems Research As shown in Figure IV-3, farming systems research is aimed at analyzing the two main elements of the small farmer's environment, namely: the technical and human elements. According to Norman (l980:3), the technical element is characterized by the following: . . . the types and physical potential of livestock and crOp enterprises, and includes physical and biological factors that have been modified to some extent by man--often through technology development. 126 .Aommav cmEuoz “momaom Ewummm mafiaumm may mo mucmCHEumumo meow mo coflumucmmmudwm oaumEmcom l l | l I l l I | A l | | | l | l l ...t_¢)m 055.6“ 1 _ L 5:5...0 V A )1 .3076); 1 a '1 a r . — n _ (a fi — .c’tfiocte“ .COR a .5560 Or: 4 Ar _ W i+ W R _ T. — .O'to arm — .013} « H 1' flossem I4. I. ,thu. : «c9372... _ 3.310.} .7 .ac.0.-w (Sfuoc spacer. lllllllll* —l v ............... . P n' Poromaox so? I' :c..oE:vccU I I' OcEtnu 30:. 30:00 .r Dcn actoz A J— a $05535 riaEEoo .auEQCuo: A11 /' .1u_9c.c.m .p c535 «acetcoo:w f.f.£..cu1\\‘ » » a .1 ECL v0» a ‘appuzx .tt.v>v C(.E~r. .2 £131. .Ctm5.&e. (it; (QJC.¢ ‘ll «36.5000- w a .mn>H whomflm IOIQUUO.Q 23¢. 0.0-Una 2.3505 127 The human element, on the other hand, is characterized by the exogenous and the endogenous factors (see Figure IV-3). Despite the fact that the exogenous factors (or the socio- cultural and institutional structures) appear to lie largely outside the control of the individual farmer; none- theless, several scholars (Norman, 1980; Swanberg, 1980) have recognized their significant impacts on the day-to- day activities of the small farmers. In contrast, Norman (l980:3) reported that the endogenous factors differ from the exogenous ones in the following respects: Unlike the exogenous factors, the endogenous factors are controlled by the farmer himself who ultimately decides on the farming system that will emerge, given the constraints imposed by the technical elements and exogenous factors. In view of the foregoing, it is quite evident that the farming systems research strategy clearly: . . . recognizes and focuses on the interdepend- encies and interrelationships between the technical and human elements in the farming systems (Norman, 1980:5). For the first time in the history of agricultural research and development for the developing nations, the small far- mers and their farm families appear to have been clearly identified and recognized as the key figures in a new research strategy. The classical "vertical" or "top-down" approach to technology development tended to concentrate on the modification of only the "technical elements to fit crops or animals and to ignore the human element" (Norman, 1980). But Norman (1980:5) has cited studies by 128 VanSchilfgaarde (197” to confirm that farming systems research approach remarkably: . . . increases the potential for fitting the animal or crop to the environment rather than Vice-versa. In other words, because the major concern of farming sys- tems researchers is the exploration of ways for improving the welfare of small farmers and their families, research efforts are, therefore, concentrated on the design of appropriate technologies that are suitable to this target population for fulfilling their production objectives. Types of Farminngystems Research Two basic types of farming systems programs that have been identified are, namely: the "upstream" and the "downstream" farming systems programs (Technical Advisory Committee, 1978). Norman (1980:5) then defined these two farming systems prOgrams in the following manner: Upstream FSR uses research from experiment stations to find prototype solutions to the major constraints on agricultural improvement in a relatively large region or area . . . (and) Downstream farming systems research is a farm-level research approach whereby farmers and a multi- disciplinary research team work together to diagnose, design, modify and improve farming systems in a local area (see Figure IV-4). It is quite evident from the above definitions that the downstream FSR is of particular relevance to small farmers in that it clearly recognizes the significant role that the farmers' knowledge, derived from accumulated 129 .Aowmav CMEHOZ "momDOm soummmwm mEmumxm mcflfinwm Emmuumc30oluam>mq Eumm on» um soummmmm mEmumxm mcHEHmm How xHOBwEmum UflumEmsom .¢I>H madman Essex» are. .1 . 4:. 3;; 5:52. 22:5: 28.3.... .o 8.23: .. u ................. /4\\ ....... . . . u n m a, n n n m m < H u A ................. :c..»o— .mcoetob . A ........................... /4.(\| uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu . u u n % «Eases» U u A\ ou>oL:E. so 9:.unv— m n n A ................... _;>sd a.«. .4 ¢_a.t_ ” u u n 4. . m A IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII .tbl|m IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII u n ” 1.5::ch .. c 2.31.. H .o >93: A ......... ,,. . a_o.i_ ::_.asm .zae_taa.. co>ataa_ eo cc.muo ~ + L n 7.532.522. a...o_.::;.; .53.: 05:22 tw_m>r “email; .3 m_wo::v.c . .253: 2:52.. 5 3.3.53: _ x ) 2:23:32. £52m 553m; _<:1_~.. z.»m>m uz_tx<. 130 experience and indigenous experimentation,will play in the process of improving their existing farming system (Norman, 1980; Whyte, 1981). Furthermore, Norman (1980) has ob- served that the active involvement of small farmers in this research process is one way of ensuring that the product of these efforts (viz: apprOpriate technologies) will definitely address their farm-level needs and production problems. As clearly shown in Figure IV-4, the schematic framework of the downstream FSR depicts the four successive research stages that must be carried out through the collaborative efforts of small farmers and the multi- disciplinary research team. Norman (1980:6) has described these four research stages in the following way: The descriptive (diagnostic) stage identifies the constraints and flexibility in the current farming systems. Based on interviews with far- mers, this information is used to design, test, and extend programs for improving farming systems. These programs are then assessed by applying eval- uation criteria derived from farmer interviews. In the final analysis, a new and improved farming system, which combines the best of the currently used system with the findings of the downstream research process, often emerges as the end product (Norman 1980, Harwood and Price, 1976). Hence, as Norman (1980) has observed, the relevant changes that may result as the product of this "grass roots" farming systems research will often involve "small adjust- ments" rather than complete or incompatible and complex changes in the system. It is, therefore, pertinent to observe that the 131 usefulness of both the "requirements-limitations gap" model and the farming systems research approach as effec- tive tools for designing appropriate technologies for small farmers cannot be overemphasized. More importantly, both strategies are oriented toward the provision of appropriate solutions to the practical agricultural production prob- lems as they affect the small-scale farmers. Some Empirical Results of Farming Systems Research Sole versus mixed cropping The traditional practice of growing crOps in mix- tures has been described as a "primitive" production tech— nique and, as such,is not compatible with "modern" agri— culture. Hence, mixed cropping was not considered worthy of serious research endeavor; Third World researchers and extension workers encouraged local farmers to plant im- proved crop varieties in sole stands. But farmers, who have traditionally grown crops in mixtures of two or more crops together, on the same field, have been reluctant to comply with the technical advice of researchers to adopt sole cropping. The rationale for the reluctance of these farmers to plant improved crop varieties in sole stands was provided through farming systems research studies in northern Nigeria. Norman (1980) cited the results of a farming systems research study by Norman, et a1.(l979) to provide empirical support for mixed cropping (see Table IV-2). 132 .Aommav :mEuOZ "mumDOm N.Hv wo.w~ om.vH 00.0N Hm.ma om.vm om.ba Uwumoo Honda Hat m.mm ma.Hm v®.mm No.vm Hv.mm ma.om hm.mm uOflda pond: mcfiumou ®.vm oh.mm vn.0m mv.mm mh.©m vo.mm vn.0m Umsam> uOc honed ”Am:\zv cusuwu uwz m.om mm.o v~.o No.0 mm.o mm.o m~.o cognac xmma unsung :w use usOcucmx N.mm mo.o mo.o Ha.o ma.o NH.o 60.0 “soc-cms Hmscc< m.vm mk.mm om.m~ om.ao om.km m.ov mo.am anxizc ”ceauoapOMQ mo ODHmD -- o.Hm .. m.~m~ .. 0.6m u- mmoa3oo m.mc- m.na~ m.~mm m.~Hv m.nmm m.mmH m.mmv muscnc50ro m.sm- m.m~n m.omm m.veo n.mmn ~.~mH m.~mo Ejzouom v.6m- «.mmm v.5mk m.oom -- o.omo v.6mn swans: "lmn\mxc cams» m.oH m.>v~ m.kem o.>ma m.m~a m.nm~ m.mmm possum xmwa gonna ~.sm m.~mm 0.46m v.6mm m.~©m o.mmv m.m~v fiancee "Ams\musoncmev Honda mousuxafi mouo Ou wHOm Eoum wusuxaz waom wusuxflz waom musuxaz mHom musuxflz menu so wHom oocmnu v .o>< H.0v o.mm H.m maouu mHOm Ou pouo>oo mmuc pmum>auasu unwound ems oma ems commmm ocazouo cg msno NOH.H mHH.~ th ASE. Hamw:fimm amazed m.mvom z.hHooH m.mm0m 2.HH0HH m.mH0m z.H00ma c0aumooa mou< encomm mwu< mflLmN mon< Ouoxow coHumufluHowmm wanmeuc> Amouowmav (HmNUHz zmmzhmoz LO mdmm< mmmxh 2H mmmZmm ZBOmO mmOmU DmxHZ Q2¢ mem LO ZOmHmcmzou NI>H mam<9 133 The results clearly indicate that the level of profit- ability or net return per hectare from mixed cropping amply demonstrate the superiority of crop mixtures over sole crops. According to Norman (1980:12), the net return per hectare from crop mixtures: . . . ranged from 32 percent to 41 percent higher, depending on how labor was costed. Also realizing that in many areas of northern Nigeria seasonal labor shortage has been reported as a major con- straint on expanding farm output, it is significant to note that the return from crops grown in mixtures per annual man-hour "was 28 percent higher than from growing crops in sole stands" (Norman, 1980:12). In other words, mixed cropping was found useful in helping to alleviate the sea- sonal labor bottleneck problem. Furthermore, Norman (1980) reported that growing crops in mixtures have been found to provide a more dependable return to local farmers in an un- predictable production environment where the pursuit of risk aversion strategies is almost inevitable. Therefore, empirical results obtained through farming systems research have clearly demonstrated that mixed cropping in traditional northern Nigerian farming systems is compatible with the technical and human elements (Norman, 1980). Thus.growing crops in mixtures has been found to be a rational strategy for small farmers confronted with labor constraint and high risk associated with uncertain weather. It is therefore not surprising 134 that researchers in Nigeria and other developing nations have now recognized the need to develop improved technol— ogies based on mixed cropping for raising productivity levels on small farms. According to Norman (1980), the FSR approach can provide the means for the application of the sum total of knowledge about agriculture, including the practices of traditional farming, in the development of relevant and improved (appropriate) technologies for small farmers. Traditional versus improved cotton technology The potential advantages of the use of the FSR approach for the development of improved technologies for small farmers have been demonstrated with the case of small- scale cotton growers in northern Nigeria. Norman (1980) has reported that an ex post farming systems research re- vealed that local farmers in northern Nigeria rejected an improved cotton technology package in which researchers in the experiment station merely emphasized higher yields and overlooked the "human element" of small farmers. The improved cotton technology package required these small farmers to not only plant earlier and in sole stands, but also to apply fertilizer and a water-based insecticide. However, Norman (1980) cited studies by Beeden, et al.(l976) to establish the reasons why virtually no farmers adopted the improved cotton recommendations in their entiretye-in spite of the fact that the net return 135 per hectare of improved cotton was considerably higher than the returns from traditional cotton. Research results in- dicate that the average labor inputs required for growing improved cotton "were 59 percent higher than those for producing traditional cotton" (Norman, 1980:15). It was also established that the return per man-hour during the seasonal labor bottleneck was 13 percent less for improved cotton than for the traditional cotton. More importantly, Norman (1980) observed that because the improved-cotton had to be planted earlier than traditional cotton, a labor con- flict arose and the local farmer had to choose between weeding his food crops or planting the improved cotton. It is important to recognize that the technical researchers simply compared the traditional and improved cotton varieties in the experiment station for yield dif- ferences. On the other hand, the local farmers carefully analyzed the requirements for growing improved cotton as part of their total farming system (Norman, 1980). Accord- ing to Norman (1980), the ex post farming systems research revealed that the local farmers did not compare improved cotton technology with the traditional cotton technology in terms of the yield differences. Rather, they compared the improved cotton technology with the labor requirements for their food crops. Therefore, the results obtained through the FSR approach suggested that one good reason for reject- ing improved cotton was the incompatibility of the new technology with endogenous factors, such as family labor 136 bottlenecks and labor availability for food production (Norman, 1980). Other reasons suggested for non—adoption included the difficulty of transporting water required for spraying and the lack of relevant production inputs such as fertilizer. Problems and Future Needs for the Imple- mentation of Farming Systems Research Shaner et al.(l982) have observed that farming systems research and development activities strongly empha~ size working with small farmers in their own fields. But, historically, most agricultural research programs have been conducted almost exclusively at the experiment stations, although sometimes supplemented by researcher-managed trials at the farmers' level. Norman (1980) also noted that research programs in agricultural institutes have traditionally been organized along disciplinary lines. Even more recently, commodity-based research programs have been advocated in several developing countries. But farming systems research includes the advancement of a more holistic approach to seeking solutions to the complex prob- lems confronting small farmers. Therefore, according to Shaner et a1. (1982), researchers currently working at regional or national agricultural experiment stations, and who are interested in the implementation of FSR, may require some reorien- tation. Shaner et al. (l982:7) suggested that this re- orientation may include: 137 . . . research methodology as applied to field conditions and methods for working with the whole farm family--male and female, young and old. Where appropriate, females may need to be added to the research and extension staff. As clearly illustrated in Figure IV-4, the farming systems research approach advocates an active interaction of the researchers with the farmers, the extension workers, and the government agencies which influence the external insti" tutions (Norman, 1980). Norman (1980:20) has identified two other practical problems that may frustrate the holistic approach to the solution of agricultural production problems as advocated in FSR. These are: 1. The farming system approach requires the integration of livestock and crop production. Research on livestock and crops, however, is often undertaken by different institutions, making integration virtually impossible. 2. A similar problem exists for social scientists (e.g., agricultural economists and sociologists) who are often located in academic institutions which are separate from government agricul- tural research institutes (Norman, 1980). But it can be asserted that these problems seem to have been solved at the international level where such organ- izations as the International Institute of TrOpical Agri- culture (IITA) and other related bodies have set up definite FSR units and programs. At the national levels, 138 Shaner et a1 (1982:6-7) have suggested that farming sys- tems research and development activities can be implemented through: . . . a semi-autonomous government corporation that has more flexibility in operations, budgeting, and personnel management than ministerial research and development organiza- tions . . . (or) a ministry of agriculture if the ministry is responsible for research and extension. A country can apply FSR & D to the activities of an experiment station in which one or more teams trained in FSR & D methods work closely with experiment station staff. Future Needs of Farming Systems Research Norman (1980) has observed that much of FSR is currently being conducted by researchers who have been trained in, or originated from, the developed countries. Consequently, their training has usually not only been discipline oriented, but also culturally limited. Hence, according to Norman (1980:21), it may be difficult for such scholars to readily appreciate and understand the importance of: . . . local wisdom and values, the complexi- ties of a farmer-household system, the role of non-economic variables, and the poten- tially significant role to be played by rural sociologists or anthropologists. A call has therefore been made for a "new breed" of researcher's who can work effectively with small farm families and in interdisciplinary research teams. A call has also been made for the placement of due emphasis on the building of lasting local institutional capabilities 139 through teaching and training of Third World scholars in farming systems research. Norman (1980) has also suggested the need for planning and policy makers in the Third World to realize that FSR can be time consuming. In other words, a con- siderable time lag usually exists from the time a small farm development problem is recognized to the discovery of a relevant solution and its subsequent adoption by the target population. It has also been pointed out that FSR approach is now being advocated in places where applied research, especially as it relates to the solution of the needs and production problems facing small holders, has not been done in the past. Therefore, it is obvious that farming systems research in the Third World will take time before it can produce significant results. According to Norman (1980), if these facts are not clearly recognized, problems may arise in the maintenance of continuity of the research process through adequate funding. However, Norman (1980) has suggested that the time between recommended solutions and farm adoption may be shortened if the link between FSR and agricultural exten- sion education can be strengthened. It is pertinent to note that this observation is in total agreement with the recommendation made elsewhere in this study with regard to the Nigerian situation. A call has been made for the establishment of a direct link between the activities of 140 the agricultural researchers in the Nigerian universities/ agricultural experiment stations and the extension educa- tion activities of the Ministries of Agriculture. Integration of Small Fagm Deyglopment Regegrch Strategies ("Upstream" and "Downstream" FSR and Swanberg's WRequirement-Limitations Gap" Model) This section of the study would not be complete without exploring the possible integration of the identi- fied strategies for developing improved technologies for small farmers. This is one way of ensuring that the strategies will neither be viewed in isolation from each other, nor be seen as either opposing to, or directly substitutable for, each other. Rather, it is believed that the products of each research approach can be used beneficially to augment the value of the others. In other words, the identified strategies for the design of appro- priate technologies for raising productivity levels on small farms should be seen as complementary to each other. Thus, they may, at best, be viewed as dissimilar approaches aimed at accomplishing the same goal--the improvement of the welfare and livelihood of small holders. Shaner et a1. (1982:37) establish the basic dif- ferences between "upstream" and "downstream" FSR in the following manner: "Upstream" reserch is characterized as being partly basic, broadly general, and supportive; whereas, "downstream" research is characterized 141 as being site specific, primarily adaptive, and useful without long delay for target groups of farmers. Gilbert el a1.(1980) further noted that, in contrast to "downstream" FSR programs which are aimed at deve10ping practices or innovations specifically tailored to a definite local situation, "upstream" FSR programs deal mainly with how to overcome major constraints common to a wide range of farming systems extending across one or more geographical areas. In this sense, "upstream" FSR approach is regarded as essentially contributing to the "body of knowledge." Seen in this light, it has therefore been suggested that prototype solutions produced from "upstream" FSR programs can be particularly useful to "downstream" FSR researchers in that those solutions can be further adapted through "downstream" FSR to site-specific situ- ations or local conditions (Gilbert et a1.,l980). This contention is equally true and applicable to the Swanberg's model in that innovations produced by the "upstream" FSR programs can be utilized for adaptation to the small farmers' reality or production environment. Therefore, the pool of knowledge generated from "upstream" FSR pro— grams can be fed to the other research strategies so that more appropriate solutions to the production constraints facing small producers in a definite production environment can be discerned. In a reciprocal manner, as argued by Gilbert et a1. (1980), "upstream" farming 142 system researchers should ultimately rely on feedback from "downstream" programs to sharpen their own research priorities and objectives. Gilbert et al.(l980) have observed that "downstream" FSR programs begin with a basic understanding of the existing farming systems and an identification of the key production constraints. The knowledge and information generated from the study of the prevailing farming systems and the production limitations confronting the target popu- lation will be particularly useful for the application of Swanberg's model. By matching the relevant production limitations confronting small holders in this production environment with the requirements of the new technology or available innovation, it becomes relatively less diffi— cult to determine whether or not the new technology is appropriate for the specific target population. Unlike Swanberg's approach, "downstream" farming systems research does not always seek to significantly alleviate the iden- tified key constraints confronting small producers. But, according to Gilbert et al.(l980), "downstream" FSR pro- grams are aimed at the identification of areas of flexi- bility in the specific farming system through an accommoda- tion of available innovations to the reality of the exist- ing constraints. In this sense, it is quite similar to the "requirements-limitations gap" model as advanced by Swanberg (1980). It is pertinent to note that both research strategies not only depend primarily on, but also 143 seek for new ways and means of, utilizing existing research results and innovations for the benefit of small farmers. This is accomplished through testing, adaptation and incor- poration directly--or with relatively minor modifications-- into the prevalent farming systems (Gilbert, et a1” 1980). In sum, Gilbert et al.(l980) have strongly con- tended that a farming systems research and development approach should basically strive for a suitable blend of "upstream" and "downstream" programs-~as determined by the availability of innovations and research results that can be easily integrated into existing farming systems. According to them (as cited by Shaner et al.,l982): Where the pool of technologies is large, "down- stream" programs can be effective in identifying and adapting the most promising approaches. (And so can be Swanberg's approach). Conversely, where basic or more general research is needed, an "upstream" approach may provide an appropriate mode for organizing research to cut across tradi- tional disciplinary and commodity lines. At the minimum, a two-way flow of information is needed from farm level to research institution and back again in the form of appropriate technologies. It is, therefore, not logical to make a "blanket recom- mendation" for the developing countries. Rather,it can be suggested that each country determine the right blend of research types to encourage based on the magnitude of basic research information or new production technologies already available. But it must be pointed out that avail- able evidence seems to suggest a dearth of appropriate technologies for small holders in most Third World coun- tries. The implication here is for an emphasis on 144 "downstream" FSR programs in these countries. This is one way of providing the much needed appropriate technologies for enhancing productivity levels on the small farms. Toward the Development of Appropriate Technologies for the Small-scale Farms: A Typology of Improved Technologies for Small Farmers It has been observed that most improved technologies for agricultural development often require an increased use of certain production resources in order to be maxi- mally effective. For instance, some of the high-yielding cereal grain varieties that have emerged out of the plant breeding breakthroughs of the Green Revolution technology often require an increased application of certain produc- tion inputs, such as fertilizers, pesticides, and irriga- tion. But, when small farmers are limited in their access of these resources (often due to multiple country-specific reasons), a production constraint is said to have arisen. It follows then, according to Swanberg (1980), that it is only when an improved technology faces no such production constraints that such a technology can be properly labelled as "appropriate"--especially for small farmers. Therefore, any effective strategy for improving the precarious production conditions facing the small producers should not only include a thorough considera- tion of the increased resource requirements associated with the profitable use of an improved technology, but 145 should also take into consideration the corresponding pro- duction limitations facing the small farmers. In other words, Swanberg (1980) has suggested that critical atten- tion must be paid to an analysis of the technical input requirements SEQ the bio-physical input combinations. This analysis will range from the study of the interactions between such factors as seed varieties and soil fertility levels, response of crops to pesticides and other protec- tion chemicals, to the performance of specific crops under varying levels of soil nutrients and moisture regimes. In addition, the effects of various chemicals on the ecologi— cal balance and subsequent environmental implications of their use and/or misuse must be carefully analyzed. Of equal significance, is the analysis of the existing socio— cultural and economic conditions facing the small farmers. Among the important variables that must be carefully studied include: farm labor profiles, liquid asset levels, farm size, market incentives, and factor-product levels, as well as the prevalent mores, values, and beliefs of the target population (Swanberg, 1980). Swanberg (1980) has also suggested that the organizations or institutions charged with the responsibility of facilitating the use of the farmer's own or borrowed resources must be criti- cally analyzed. These include: credit, input supply, and marketing institutions, as well as the agricultural processing, storage and transportation systems. In addi- tion, the small farmers' perceptions of their real 146 production problems and needs, including their risk-bearing potentials,must be ascertained and evaluated. In the final analysis, Swanberg (1980) has suggested that harmony must be attained and established between the resource require- ments for the successful implementation of a new technology and the corresponding production limitations facing the small producers. Only after such a balance has been estab» lished (through the bridging of requirements-limitations gap) can the proposed improved technology be rightly described as "appropriate" for the small farmers. This is the basis for the development of a typology of improved technologies for enhancing production on small farms. A Typology of Improved Agricultural Technologies In order to precisely determine when any new agri- cultural technology should be described as "appropriate" for small farmers, a typology of improved technologies has been established. Historically,the economic dimensions of new technologies for small-scale farmers, such as their low-cost and labor intensive characteristics, have been over-emphasized as the basis for the design and even subsequent transfer of improved agricultural technologies. Thus, for example, a low-cost and labor intensive tech- nology that has been specifically designed for an identi- fied target population (say, the small holders of a rural community in a temperate environment) would be assumed to be equally effective in, and therefore, directly 147 transferable to, a fairly similar target audience (say, the rural small holders of Nigeria). But this notion is no longer tenable. Available evidence clearly indicates that the assumptions are too simplistic; there are other relevant factors that must be carefully considered in any attempt to determine the "appropriateness" of a new tech- nology or innovation among an identified target population. Apart from the socio-economic variables, Swanberg (1980) has suggested the need to consider other relevant socio- cultural, biophysical and ecological variables in a given production environment in any efforts to determine the "appropriateness" of a new technology for a target popula- tion in that environment. Therefore, Swanberg (1980) has advanced a four- category typology. According to him, improved agricul- tural technologies generally fall into any one of the four categories--only one of which leads directly to the development of "appropriate" technologies. Figure IV-5 clearly illustrates the conditions and specific variables which determine the four types of improved technologies and their status with respect to "appropriateness." The insights gained from a framework for resource development policy, as detailed by Barlowe (1976), provides the basis for developing the specified variables in the conceptual framework shown in Figure IV-5. Barlowe (1976) has high- lighted the essential importance of physical and biologi- cal, economic, and institutional considerations as factors 148 that affect the successful development and use of a natural resource, as well as the operation of policies that deal with the management of that resource. Type 1 technologies As shown in Figure IV-S, Type 1 technologies, which fall into the "appropriate" class, refer to the condition in which the bio-physical and ecological factors, as well as the socio-cultural and economic requirements of the im- proved technologies, are in conformity with the existing production limitations facing the small farmers. In other words, the resource requirements for the successful imple— mentation of the new technologies are in harmony with the production constraints facing the small producers. Swanberg (1980) illustrated the above condition by referring to the development of most new high—yielding and disease resistant seed varieties (such as the IR8 rice hybrid in the Philippines, the Guantiva and Purace potato varieties in Colombia, and the Katumani maize composite in Kenya) as common examples of this type of improved tech- nologies. The rationale for this classification is based on the finding that the cultivation of these improved seed varieties has resulted in increased crop yields without demanding substantial increases in resource requirements. With respect to the Purace potato variety, for example, Swanberg (l980:5) has observed: . . . in Colombia, fertilizer and pesticide requirements for the Purace potato variety mOOHOIncrecwbb >20 MOOZOZHO\HZMHHHCHHOZ>F mm>2m€0wx monwww use nzwncnmw BONmmnunoapwwwanm ten: monmpnma ocmnoam. cmwcmm. unnwncamm 9:0 Umwpmmm . vnoacnnwnnmpnmv~m nwmnnHVano: Om Hanoam man onzmn Umammwnm . voHanan mnompnmvawn< mad Hmomwwnppnopnewnmv brawnmnwosm H HH air, climate FRAMEWORK Avoidance of environmental degradation BIO-PHYSICAL AND ECOLOGICAL and non—humans (plants and animals) Sustainable physical base--geology, and groups of human beings Sound ecological relationships soils, water, practices Beneficial association between people ' Symbiotic relationships--between humans mmmocnnm munchnmamsnm mm