210
9
► Example
The Machakos District in Kenya represents a well-known case in the political ecology
and development studies literature that supports the idea that smallholder production
may be sustainable (Tiffen et al. 1994). In the 1930s, this district was marked by soil erosion and what colonial environmental and agricultural officials saw as land degradation
caused by overpopulation. While the population in the district was 240,000 in 1932,
it had increased to 1.4 million in 1990. At the same time, erosion had, however, been
reduced and the environment improved through widespread tree planting and terracing
leading to large increases in production of coffee and maize both per capita and per
area. The researchers behind this study concluded that this development was possible
due to population increase providing more manpower to work the land combined with
a policy change in Kenya after independence. During colonization, coffee production
for the market had been reserved for white settlers, but with independence, small-scale
producers got access to the coffee market in nearby Nairobi. Hence, population increase
combined with access to coffee as a cash-crop facilitated this development that has been
labelled ‘sustainable intensification’ (Tiffen et al. 1994). ◄
A recent longitudinal case study from central Tanzania for the period 1991–2016
also found substantially increased income and improved livelihoods generated by
small-scale cash-crop farming, in this case farming of sunflower (Östberg et al.
2018). In a related study from the same research group from rural northern
Tanzania, Brockington et al. (2018) also found significantly increased prosperity
In this chapter, we give examples of such land grabbing. This is a metaphor
that has been successfully used by a number of journalists, activists and scholars
to highlight unequal power relations and that some powerful actors manage to
‘grab’ land from smallholders who have historically used the land. Such land
grabbing is the result of modernization thinking that sees development as a linear
progression from small-scale farming to industrialized large-scale agriculture
linked to global markets (McKeon 2015; Bergius et al. 2018). Some entrepreneurial
smallholders are expected to integrate into these global value chains, while others
who are unable to switch from a ‘peasant mentality’ to become modern farmers are
expected to leave agricultural production altogether (Bergius et al. 2018). In fact,
the transfer of land to more efficient farmers (‘land mobility’) lies at the heart of
this modernization thinking. Its implication is that the scale of agriculture is
increased, while the number of people making a living from agriculture is reduced
(Woodhouse 2012; McKeon 2015; Bergius et al. 2018). This process again leads to
de-peasantization as smallholders are squeezed out and forced to migrate to less
fertile lands or urban slums (Araghi 1995, 2000; Davis 2006).
However, we argue in this chapter that contrary to the assumptions behind
modernization thinking, small-scale farming may perform well both economically
and environmentally, and not the least employ a maximum number of people if
facilitated by government policies.
Chapter 9 · Population Growth, Markets and Sustainable Land-Use in Africa
9
► Example
The Machakos District in Kenya represents a well-known case in the political ecology
and development studies literature that supports the idea that smallholder production
may be sustainable (Tiffen et al. 1994). In the 1930s, this district was marked by soil erosion and what colonial environmental and agricultural officials saw as land degradation
caused by overpopulation. While the population in the district was 240,000 in 1932,
it had increased to 1.4 million in 1990. At the same time, erosion had, however, been
reduced and the environment improved through widespread tree planting and terracing
leading to large increases in production of coffee and maize both per capita and per
area. The researchers behind this study concluded that this development was possible
due to population increase providing more manpower to work the land combined with
a policy change in Kenya after independence. During colonization, coffee production
for the market had been reserved for white settlers, but with independence, small-scale
producers got access to the coffee market in nearby Nairobi. Hence, population increase
combined with access to coffee as a cash-crop facilitated this development that has been
labelled ‘sustainable intensification’ (Tiffen et al. 1994). ◄
A recent longitudinal case study from central Tanzania for the period 1991–2016
also found substantially increased income and improved livelihoods generated by
small-scale cash-crop farming, in this case farming of sunflower (Östberg et al.
2018). In a related study from the same research group from rural northern
Tanzania, Brockington et al. (2018) also found significantly increased prosperity
In this chapter, we give examples of such land grabbing. This is a metaphor
that has been successfully used by a number of journalists, activists and scholars
to highlight unequal power relations and that some powerful actors manage to
‘grab’ land from smallholders who have historically used the land. Such land
grabbing is the result of modernization thinking that sees development as a linear
progression from small-scale farming to industrialized large-scale agriculture
linked to global markets (McKeon 2015; Bergius et al. 2018). Some entrepreneurial
smallholders are expected to integrate into these global value chains, while others
who are unable to switch from a ‘peasant mentality’ to become modern farmers are
expected to leave agricultural production altogether (Bergius et al. 2018). In fact,
the transfer of land to more efficient farmers (‘land mobility’) lies at the heart of
this modernization thinking. Its implication is that the scale of agriculture is
increased, while the number of people making a living from agriculture is reduced
(Woodhouse 2012; McKeon 2015; Bergius et al. 2018). This process again leads to
de-peasantization as smallholders are squeezed out and forced to migrate to less
fertile lands or urban slums (Araghi 1995, 2000; Davis 2006).
However, we argue in this chapter that contrary to the assumptions behind
modernization thinking, small-scale farming may perform well both economically
and environmentally, and not the least employ a maximum number of people if
facilitated by government policies.
Chapter 9 · Population Growth, Markets and Sustainable Land-Use in Africa