industrial crop production, which could alleviate investor uncertainty and help
attract sustained investment (Chaps. 2 and 5 Vol. 1).
There have been such coordinated national efforts in countries such as Burkina
Faso, Malawi and Swaziland, where a strong policy commitment over decades has
made cotton, tobacco and sugarcane the cornerstones of their respective economies
(Terry and Ogg 2017; Johnson and Silveira 2014; Boafo et al. 2018; Tschirley et al.
2009) (Sect. 3.3.1). This would entail strengthening industrial crop markets and
streamlining all stages of the value chain, from the land acquisition, to the economic
aspects of crop production, refinement, valourization of waste and final product use.
As the actual interventions and long-term strategies might be crop- and area-specific,
it would be necessary to factor national and local contexts. Some additional foci for
large-scale plantations would be to ensure that (a) worker salaries are sufficient to
buy food locally, (b) seasonal/part-time employment is based on a standard salary
rate (and not on a picking rate), (c) flexible employment is possible during important
periods of crop calendar year (e.g. during food crop sowing, harvesting). All of these
actions could create very strong linkages among various SDGs namely SDG8
(descent work and economic growth), SDG9 (industry, innovation and infrastructure), SDG1 (no poverty) and of course SDG2 (zero hunger).
Regarding the second priority domain, it would be necessary to understand the
possible environmental and food production trade-offs from industrial crop expansion. This could be achieved through robust baseline studies undertaken prior to the
development of industrial crop projects that should seek to understand the decisionmaking processes of local farmers in terms of land allocation, and the adoption of
crops and farming practices. This information can help build a strong evidence-base
to guide the development and implementation of context-specific interventions that
seek to minimize the negative trade-offs of industrial crop production. However,
these aspects are rarely considered during project design, even in commonly used
instruments such as environmental impact assessments (EIAs) (e.g. German et al.
2013). Thus it would be necessary to “enforce” the provision of this type of
information (and identify possible mitigation option in the face of important tradeoffs) prior to the approval of large-scale industrial crop projects.
Furthermore, it is important to rationalize the use of agrochemicals and irrigation
water both in large plantations and smallholder settings. The former could help
reduce the negative environmental impacts of industrial crop production, and the
latter could ensure water availability to other water users, especially during periods
of water scarcity. However, EIAs have little power to deal with such effects in
smallholder settings as individual farmers can unilaterally decide to start and halt
industrial crop production based on market signals. Even though engagement in
industrial crop production improves access to agricultural inputs (and sometimes
irrigation) (Sect. 3.3.2.2), smallholders often lack the capacity to utilize them in
environmentally and socially responsible manners (Morris et al. 2007). Capacitybuilding efforts and the promotion of responsible production practices through the
support packages offered to industrial crop smallholders could go a long way
towards achieving this. However, increasing the environmental and social
3 Linking Industrial Crop Production and Food Security in Sub-Saharan Africa:. . .
123
attract sustained investment (Chaps. 2 and 5 Vol. 1).
There have been such coordinated national efforts in countries such as Burkina
Faso, Malawi and Swaziland, where a strong policy commitment over decades has
made cotton, tobacco and sugarcane the cornerstones of their respective economies
(Terry and Ogg 2017; Johnson and Silveira 2014; Boafo et al. 2018; Tschirley et al.
2009) (Sect. 3.3.1). This would entail strengthening industrial crop markets and
streamlining all stages of the value chain, from the land acquisition, to the economic
aspects of crop production, refinement, valourization of waste and final product use.
As the actual interventions and long-term strategies might be crop- and area-specific,
it would be necessary to factor national and local contexts. Some additional foci for
large-scale plantations would be to ensure that (a) worker salaries are sufficient to
buy food locally, (b) seasonal/part-time employment is based on a standard salary
rate (and not on a picking rate), (c) flexible employment is possible during important
periods of crop calendar year (e.g. during food crop sowing, harvesting). All of these
actions could create very strong linkages among various SDGs namely SDG8
(descent work and economic growth), SDG9 (industry, innovation and infrastructure), SDG1 (no poverty) and of course SDG2 (zero hunger).
Regarding the second priority domain, it would be necessary to understand the
possible environmental and food production trade-offs from industrial crop expansion. This could be achieved through robust baseline studies undertaken prior to the
development of industrial crop projects that should seek to understand the decisionmaking processes of local farmers in terms of land allocation, and the adoption of
crops and farming practices. This information can help build a strong evidence-base
to guide the development and implementation of context-specific interventions that
seek to minimize the negative trade-offs of industrial crop production. However,
these aspects are rarely considered during project design, even in commonly used
instruments such as environmental impact assessments (EIAs) (e.g. German et al.
2013). Thus it would be necessary to “enforce” the provision of this type of
information (and identify possible mitigation option in the face of important tradeoffs) prior to the approval of large-scale industrial crop projects.
Furthermore, it is important to rationalize the use of agrochemicals and irrigation
water both in large plantations and smallholder settings. The former could help
reduce the negative environmental impacts of industrial crop production, and the
latter could ensure water availability to other water users, especially during periods
of water scarcity. However, EIAs have little power to deal with such effects in
smallholder settings as individual farmers can unilaterally decide to start and halt
industrial crop production based on market signals. Even though engagement in
industrial crop production improves access to agricultural inputs (and sometimes
irrigation) (Sect. 3.3.2.2), smallholders often lack the capacity to utilize them in
environmentally and socially responsible manners (Morris et al. 2007). Capacitybuilding efforts and the promotion of responsible production practices through the
support packages offered to industrial crop smallholders could go a long way
towards achieving this. However, increasing the environmental and social
3 Linking Industrial Crop Production and Food Security in Sub-Saharan Africa:. . .
123