342
ience towards shocks. However, climate-smart seed and value addition from seed
production is just one possible example of a niche activity that could be pursued by
both the GoM and small-scale farmers. More and better value addition options may
be pursued through bottom-up initiatives in which farmers are active partners in
identifying ways of reducing poverty and food insecurity whilst at the same time
contributing to climate change adaptation and a more sustainable food system.
Donor dependency and influence are high in Malawi, and donor priorities are
important drivers in relation to policy and action. The WB (2018: x–xii) underlines
that the foundational issues of weak governance, lack of ability to implement policy
and gender inequality need to be addressed and suggests four different strategic
pathways for Malawi for the years ahead:
• Increasing agricultural productivity, commercialization and diversification
• Diversifying the economy and creating jobs, including structural transformation, private sector and service delivery
• Harnessing the demographic dividend and building human capital
• Building resilience against shocks and enhancing environmental sustainability
including strengthening of social protection programs
Earlier in this paper, we reviewed GoM’s policies and strategies that, to a large
degree, already cover these four pathways, though policy implementation and
thereby the delivery of results have been challenging. However, regarding the first
pathway of agricultural productivity, the input subsidy program is an example of
national ownership followed by ability to implement policy that, in a specific period
(2005/2006–2013/2015), yielded good results and kept serious hunger at bay (Pauw
et al. 2014; Haug and Wold 2017). Although input subsidies alone are far from
enough to ensure a sustainable food system in Malawi, FISP provides useful lessons
regarding implementation capability. Simultaneously prioritizing all four pathways
will be a challenging strategy for Malawi within the current situation of weak governance, inadequate monetary resources and limited institutional capacity, as highlighted by the WB. It is of course vital to know what to do, but a lesson learnt from
Malawi is that it is equally important to know how to do it – how can Malawi implement its policies?
6 Conclusion
A food system approach provides the opportunity for an integrated analysis of drivers and constraints that influence the food system, as well as a holistic understanding of how policies, programs and institutional actions can contribute to a more
sustainable food system. Malawi relates to a broad range of national and international policies aiming to improve the food security and poverty situation in the
country; however, only a few of these policies are implemented with visible
improvements at the rural household level. Lessons learned from policies and
actions in the Malawian food system include the importance of national ownership
R. Haug and O. T. Westengen
ience towards shocks. However, climate-smart seed and value addition from seed
production is just one possible example of a niche activity that could be pursued by
both the GoM and small-scale farmers. More and better value addition options may
be pursued through bottom-up initiatives in which farmers are active partners in
identifying ways of reducing poverty and food insecurity whilst at the same time
contributing to climate change adaptation and a more sustainable food system.
Donor dependency and influence are high in Malawi, and donor priorities are
important drivers in relation to policy and action. The WB (2018: x–xii) underlines
that the foundational issues of weak governance, lack of ability to implement policy
and gender inequality need to be addressed and suggests four different strategic
pathways for Malawi for the years ahead:
• Increasing agricultural productivity, commercialization and diversification
• Diversifying the economy and creating jobs, including structural transformation, private sector and service delivery
• Harnessing the demographic dividend and building human capital
• Building resilience against shocks and enhancing environmental sustainability
including strengthening of social protection programs
Earlier in this paper, we reviewed GoM’s policies and strategies that, to a large
degree, already cover these four pathways, though policy implementation and
thereby the delivery of results have been challenging. However, regarding the first
pathway of agricultural productivity, the input subsidy program is an example of
national ownership followed by ability to implement policy that, in a specific period
(2005/2006–2013/2015), yielded good results and kept serious hunger at bay (Pauw
et al. 2014; Haug and Wold 2017). Although input subsidies alone are far from
enough to ensure a sustainable food system in Malawi, FISP provides useful lessons
regarding implementation capability. Simultaneously prioritizing all four pathways
will be a challenging strategy for Malawi within the current situation of weak governance, inadequate monetary resources and limited institutional capacity, as highlighted by the WB. It is of course vital to know what to do, but a lesson learnt from
Malawi is that it is equally important to know how to do it – how can Malawi implement its policies?
6 Conclusion
A food system approach provides the opportunity for an integrated analysis of drivers and constraints that influence the food system, as well as a holistic understanding of how policies, programs and institutional actions can contribute to a more
sustainable food system. Malawi relates to a broad range of national and international policies aiming to improve the food security and poverty situation in the
country; however, only a few of these policies are implemented with visible
improvements at the rural household level. Lessons learned from policies and
actions in the Malawian food system include the importance of national ownership
R. Haug and O. T. Westengen