local labour costs, thus reducing affordable local labour options for food crop
production (Borman et al. 2013).
Studies have linked some of the positive local food security outcomes of industrial crop production to the improved access of smallholders to farming inputs and
technology transfer (A5–6). This includes improved access to various factors of
production, including:
– Fertilizers (e.g. Brambilla and Portoy 2011; Delpeuch and Leblois 2014;
Govereha and Jayne 2003; Kaminski et al. 2011; Herrmann et al. 2018; von
Maltitz et al. 2019).
– Diverse varieties of food crops and seeds (Bussolo et al. 2007).
– Irrigation (Negash and Swinnen 2013; von Maltitz et al. 2019).
– Technical support (e.g. Kalinda et al. 2015; Bello-Bravo et al. 2015).
– Other environmentally friendly agricultural inputs (e.g. Bassett 2010).
Improved access to all of the above can enhance the yields of both industrial and
food crops, reducing (or even reversing) the effects of land competition (mechanism
A1, see above). However, some studies have also found that industrial crop production can increase local fertilizer demand, and thus its price, reducing its affordability
to poorer households for food crop production (e.g. Borman et al. 2013; van Eijck
et al. 2012).
3.3.2.3 Food Access
Most studies in the “food access” pillar by far focus on the positive local food
security outcomes brought by income, employment and occupation generation
(B4–5) (Table 3.6). For example, many studies have identified that involvement in
industrial crop production can boost existing income (e.g. Banye 2015; Ferris et al.
2001; Suleman et al. 2014; Govereha and Jayne 2003), or create additional income
sources (e.g. Onoji et al. 2016; Dyer et al. 2012; Favretto et al. 2014). Even though
the generated income often quite low and depend on the crop type and mode of
engagement (e.g. smallholder vs. plantation worker), this income can be constant
and allow better planning within the household (German et al. 2011), or come during
periods of low food security acting thus as a livelihood buffer (von Maltitz et al.
2016).
In terms of employment and occupation generation, many studies have reported
the positive effect of industrial crop production on local employment opportunities,
especially in poor rural areas with few formal employment options (Duvenage et al.
2012; Dyer et al. 2012; von Maltitz et al. 2016). Sometimes employment opportunities are seasonal (e.g. James and Woodhouse 2016; Matenga 2016), and can
enhance self-employment (e.g. Kuntashula et al. 2014; Chivuraise 2011) or
women employment (e.g. Bosch and Zeller 2013).
3 Linking Industrial Crop Production and Food Security in Sub-Saharan Africa:. . .
115
production (Borman et al. 2013).
Studies have linked some of the positive local food security outcomes of industrial crop production to the improved access of smallholders to farming inputs and
technology transfer (A5–6). This includes improved access to various factors of
production, including:
– Fertilizers (e.g. Brambilla and Portoy 2011; Delpeuch and Leblois 2014;
Govereha and Jayne 2003; Kaminski et al. 2011; Herrmann et al. 2018; von
Maltitz et al. 2019).
– Diverse varieties of food crops and seeds (Bussolo et al. 2007).
– Irrigation (Negash and Swinnen 2013; von Maltitz et al. 2019).
– Technical support (e.g. Kalinda et al. 2015; Bello-Bravo et al. 2015).
– Other environmentally friendly agricultural inputs (e.g. Bassett 2010).
Improved access to all of the above can enhance the yields of both industrial and
food crops, reducing (or even reversing) the effects of land competition (mechanism
A1, see above). However, some studies have also found that industrial crop production can increase local fertilizer demand, and thus its price, reducing its affordability
to poorer households for food crop production (e.g. Borman et al. 2013; van Eijck
et al. 2012).
3.3.2.3 Food Access
Most studies in the “food access” pillar by far focus on the positive local food
security outcomes brought by income, employment and occupation generation
(B4–5) (Table 3.6). For example, many studies have identified that involvement in
industrial crop production can boost existing income (e.g. Banye 2015; Ferris et al.
2001; Suleman et al. 2014; Govereha and Jayne 2003), or create additional income
sources (e.g. Onoji et al. 2016; Dyer et al. 2012; Favretto et al. 2014). Even though
the generated income often quite low and depend on the crop type and mode of
engagement (e.g. smallholder vs. plantation worker), this income can be constant
and allow better planning within the household (German et al. 2011), or come during
periods of low food security acting thus as a livelihood buffer (von Maltitz et al.
2016).
In terms of employment and occupation generation, many studies have reported
the positive effect of industrial crop production on local employment opportunities,
especially in poor rural areas with few formal employment options (Duvenage et al.
2012; Dyer et al. 2012; von Maltitz et al. 2016). Sometimes employment opportunities are seasonal (e.g. James and Woodhouse 2016; Matenga 2016), and can
enhance self-employment (e.g. Kuntashula et al. 2014; Chivuraise 2011) or
women employment (e.g. Bosch and Zeller 2013).
3 Linking Industrial Crop Production and Food Security in Sub-Saharan Africa:. . .
115