Science Forum 2013 (www.scienceforum13.org) Breakout Session 9: Farm Size, Urbanization and the Links from Agriculture to Nutrition and Health Agnes Andersson Djurfeldt, Lund University

1. Urbanization and Changes in Farm Size in Sub-
Saharan Africa and linkages to food security
and nutrition
Agnes Andersson Djurfeldt
Department of Human Geography, Lund University

2. The big picture
• Urbanization
• Changes in farm size
• Consequences for food security and
farming
• Limitations of the big picture

3. Urbanization and urban
growth
• Urban population growth rate
• Urban growth driven by
-natural increase
-(net) rural to urban migration
-reclassification
-boundary changes
• Why does this matter?
• Urbanization: urban population growth
is faster than rural population growth

4. Measuring urban growth
• Global comparisons and analysis
based on UN projections
• Based in turn on latest census
data and estimates
• Quality and comparability issues
• Other data sources: E-geopolis,
World Bank agglomeration index
use universal criteria

5. Empirical tendencies
• African urban growth driven
primarily by natural increase
• Break with patterns from the
1960s/1970s, migration, 40%
• Reclassification, around 25%
between 1950-1980
• Regional differences pronounced,
overall urban population share
37%

6. African population growth rates
1950-2015
• Slowing rates of urban annual growth,
peak in the 1960s (explains
overestimated urban growth)
• Lower mortality in urban areas and
high fertility, but signs of falling fertility
in the 1990s
• Decline in migration as a source of
urban growth
• Poverty rates much less improved than
in Asia
• More than half of urban population in
towns below 500 000 inhabitants
Source: UN-DESA World Urbanization Prospects, the
2011 revision

7. Changes in farm size in
Africa
• Declining average farm size
• Also mean per capita land size
seems to be declining.
• Top quartile farms on average four
to nine times bigger than in the
bottom quartile.
• Large variation in farm size within
countries

8. Effects on agriculture and
food security in rural areas
• Shifting urban dietary
preferences
• Potential commercial
opportunities
• Household level RUL
• Inclusion rests on accessibility,
type of urban growth dynamics,
city size distribution and
institutional aspects

9. Limitations of relying on the big picture
• Pockets of intensification
• Differences in soil fertility and
climate
• Differences in access to urban
areas, markets, etc.
• Local institutional aspects
• Village level studies an important
complement to macro-level ones

10. Available micro level data
The Afrint Project
•2002: the possibilities and
challenges of staple crop
intensification
•2008: follow up on round one, to
gauge changes in the staple crop
sector.
•2013: farm-non farm interaction and
gender

11. African micro study
• 9 countries
• 20 regions
• 103 villages
• 4000 households (2354 in the
panel from 2002 to 2008)
• Purposively sampled in
dynamic and less dynamic
regions (21 in total)
• Representative at the village
level
11

12. What is the problem?
2000-
2002
Mean
yield
(t/ha)
2000-
2002
Potential
yield
(t/ha)
2000-
2002
Yield gap
(%)
2006-
2008
Mean
yield
(t/ha)
2006-
2008
Potential
yield
(t/ha)
2006-
2008
Yield gap
(%)
Maize 1,26 3,71 66% 1,08 2,91 63%
Sorghum 0,71 1,54 54% 0,39 1,04 63%
Rice 1,21 3,01 60% 1,23 2,82 57%
Partly/fully irrigated rice 1,75 4,27 59% 1,92 3,88 51%

13. Why is this a problem?
• Farmers are greatly reliant on farm income
• Non farm cash income makes up 34% of
total cash income for those who have this
type of income
• Around half the sample (51% in 2002 and
47% in 2008) lack non-farm income

14. Production related
constraints
• Decreasing farm sizes – from 2.42 to
2.16 ha.
• Very low use of fertilizer
• Low use of improved seed technology
• Uneven access to land
• Gender based discrimination
in access to productive resources

15. Market related
constraints
• Smallholder are both producers
and consumers
• Expensive inputs, low producer
prices
• Livelihoods prone to seasonality,
extreme weather events –
hedging bets outside agriculture
to avoid seasonal shifts
• Division of labour over time and
space crucial
• Multi-spatial systems of
consumption
• Vicious cycle of poor producer
and consumer confidence in the
market as a provider of food
• Only half of the growers of
maize, cassava, and rice sell
some any output. A third for
sorghum.
• Share of non-commercialized
farmers has increased from 17%
to 21%.
• More maize but less sorghum is
being sold.
• Staple crop amounts sold
remain very low.

16. Consumption pressures related to multi-local
patterns of consumption and production
• Livelihoods prone to seasonality, extreme
weather events
• Division of labour over time and space
crucial
• Multi-spatial systems of consumption –
urban reliance on rural food
• Generally not reported in surveys –
considered to be part of household
consumption
• Underestimates the subsistence
obligations of the rural household

17. Food security and maize transfers
Income
quintiles
countrywise
Maize
retained
per CU
including
transfers
(kg)
Maize
retained per
CU
excluding
transfers (kg)
Number of
meals eaten
during lean
season
N
Q1 82 64 1,95 151
Q2 103 86 2,16 205
Q3 138 113 2,20 238
Q4 185 152 2,29 280
Q5 247 209 2,41 316
Total 165 136 2,24 1190

18. Agricultural growth dynamics strongly
concentrated
• Two dynamic types of production systems: mixed
farming, grain focused, extensive versus intensive,
high value crops in areas close to urban markets.
• Male earnings in the grains sector versus entry into
vegetable markets by female headed households
• Pro-poor agrarian growth strongly concentrated to
particular villages.
• Geographic rather than internal polarization
• Connection to markets varies greatly
• Most marginal areas: a retreat into subsistence,
withdrawal from technology use, shrinking
household sizes

19. Linkages to the nonfarm sector
• Panel level data suggests a movement out
of the nonfarm sector and a return to
farming.
• High mobility between the two sectors
and types of nonfarm earnings
• Clear gender implications, with earnings
from the nonfarm sector making up for
poorer access to farm incomes for female
headed households
• The role of the nonfarm sector differs by
type of region

20. Strategic areas for agricultural
research vary by region
Well-connected, dynamic, intensive
-extension/education to meet standards
-market co-ordination
-irrigation
Grain based, mixed farming
-Technology for rainfed agriculture
-Commercial opportunities outside grains
-Small stock, livestock
-Micro-credit schemes
Marginal areas
-food security must be prioritized – little scope for
commercialization
-subsidized inputs
-cash transfers
-education improvements