Negative perception of agriculture in Central Equatoria

Negative perception of agriculture: a case of unsatisfied expectations in Central Equatoria State

By Jacob K. Lupai

May 19, 2009 — To understand absolutely the importance of agriculture, it may be helpful to highlight that world leaders and civil servants the world over have something to chew for breakfast before setting off to offices for their daily routines. That something chewed is about hundred per cent consisting of agricultural derivatives that provide the necessary nutrition for healthy living and productivity. It is therefore fair to say that limited agricultural production with a growing population means too many mouths without food which may mean hunger, and it is difficult to see how the hungry can be productive. One authority said hunger dulls intellects and thwarts productivity, keeping people and communities from realising their potentials. People may have a lot of money but money is not everything because even with money people can still starve when the markets are empty of food items. However, improved transport system may be part of the solution.

Policy makers have long recognised the importance of agriculture in the achievement of food security. Building on work already done we can identify different contributions that agriculture can make to food security, namely agriculture as food, livelihood, a market, raw materials, foreign exchange and surplus. This may explain how the Government of Southern Sudan (GOSS) in its food and agriculture policy framework said it will strive to make Southern Sudan fully food secure to the extent of producing quality surplus products for local, regional and international markets. The importance of agriculture is also echoed by the Government of Central Equatoria State in its policy statement on the strategic plan to modernise agriculture in order to achieve self-sufficiency in food production. This all suggests that both the GOSS and the Government of Central Equatoria State view agriculture as of top priority. However, whether this is being translated into tangible benefits on the ground is an open question.

In division of labour or supposedly in a decentralised system the GOSS should have been seen as the policy maker while a State in Southern Sudan as the implementer of the GOSS policy on the ground to realise the common goal of poverty eradication. The President of the GOSS is on record advocating for effective decentralisation. However, despite the President’s reiterated support for decentralisation there seems to be hardly anything happening to that effect on the ground. As headed by the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM) and as the dominant party in government, the GOSS should have supported the SPLM’s vision of decentralised development and on policies and interventions designed to consolidate peace and deliver tangible benefits to the population. However, at the 6th Governors’ Forum held in Juba there was a complaint of continuous interference from some GOSS line ministries in the area of implementation which should have been the competence of the State. This clearly suggests a problem and the implication could be a negative impact on development in general and on agricultural production in particular. With an adoption of a bottom-up approach the perceived interference of the GOSS in State affairs could have been minimised.

As a government is supposed to serve the public interest so does the public perceptions of government performance is helpful in assessing the extent of people’s satisfaction with their government. In this context Central Equatoria State is taken for the public perception of the state of agriculture. According to Join Assessment Mission (JAM) of 25 February 2005 transforming the agriculture sector and promoting private sector development are central to the challenge of sustainable peace and development in Southern Sudan. Four years into the six-year interim period of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) it is public perception that can be helpful in gauging the extent to which agriculture is seen to have been transformed for self-reliance in production for the achievement of food security.

Perceptions by members of public of the state of agriculture are assessed. It has been perceived that the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, Animal Resources and Fisheries in Central Equatoria State has deliberately distanced itself from farmers and has lost control over all the key forestry reserves in the State. It has also been perceived that there are no agricultural products seen but only charcoal which is claim, and rightly so, to encourage deforestation. In conclusion it has been perceived that uncountable number of unauthorised slaughter houses is multiplying all over the State. In informal exchange of views on agriculture some members of the public perceived that all food commodities are shipped from the neighbouring countries. They said the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, Animal Resources and Fisheries in Central Equatoria State is doing nothing despite the claim that there are experts in the Ministry.

The above are pretty serious negative perceptions of the state of agriculture in Central Equatoria. However, they seem at best an expression of frustration over dismal failures of service delivery in Southern Sudan as a whole. In all fairness the public should be informed that the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, Animal Resources and Fisheries in Central Equatoria State is doing what it could in the circumstances of enormous challenges. The Ministry faces budgetary constraints. According to 2008 Budget Allocations Agriculture, Forestry and Animal Resources combined had a total budget of 5.47 per cent. Agriculture in its own right had only a budget of 2.09 per cent of the overall budget for 2008. This is in contrast to the claim that agriculture is the backbone of the economy. Agriculture should have been a top priority with a lion’s share in budgetary allocations. However, despite enormous challenges, at Jebel Lado there is a dura (sorghum) scheme rehabilitated with investment by Canadian Economic Development Assistance for Southern Sudan (CEDASS). The Ministry is distributing various seed to farmers in the counties. The Ministry has also been involved in community needs assessment with Livelihood Improvement Project for Southern Sudan (LIPS) funded by Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA). It had earlier commissioned a specialised team of technicians for farmers’ needs assessment in the counties of Kajo Keji, Morobo, Yei and Lainya. The farmers’ needs assessment exercise yielded the necessary information for planning purposes. All this does not suggest that the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, Animal Resources and Fisheries in Central Equatoria State has deliberately distanced itself from farmers. The perception that the Ministry has deliberately distanced itself from farmers is erroneous and misleading.

The perception that the Ministry has lost control over all key forestry reserves is again arguable. The problem is that the GOSS is inclined to control what is in Central Equatoria State but may not be the Case in the other States. It is important to assert that the Ministry has not lost control over all key forestry reserves in the State. It is still a running battle as the GOSS is determined to use a top-down approach by acting unilaterally. For example, the carpentry and joinery workshop No. 2 based in Juba was operated by the Directorate of Forestry in Central Equatoria State. The GOSS Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry unilaterally decided to hire it out to a foreign businessman without the involvement of the State authorities in the deal. The GOSS Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry staff also chased away State employees from Loka Forestry Reserve claiming it was a national project hence under the GOSS. With inadequate consultation a company called Central Equatoria Teak Plantation was to manage Loka, Korobe and Kajiko North plantations. However, the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, Animal Resources and Fisheries in Central Equatoria State has not accepted the company pending further consultation and the possible involvement of the State Legislative Assembly. The claim that the Ministry has lost control over all forestry reserves is therefore incorrect.

The main problem may be that there is poor consultation between the State and the GOSS Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry for clarification of issues. For example, the GOSS Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry says management policies, utilisation and technical administration including payment of salaries to employees in the forests in the State will be provided by the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry. At the same time the GOSS Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry says the day-to-day supervision and general administration shall be provided by the State Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, Animal Resources and Fisheries in Central Equatoria. There seems to be some confusion. This may be confirmed by the chasing away of the State employees by the staff of the GOSS Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry claiming they were the ones in-charge. We are optimistic that with consultation statements that seem confusing can be refined for an amicable resolution.

The claim that there are no agricultural products but only charcoal is amusing indeed. Of course there are agricultural products. A visit to a market in Juba shows that there are plenty of fresh vegetables, dry food items and a variety of fresh fruit. The Ministry does not produce but helps farmers to produce and farmers in Central Equatoria State are precisely doing that. It is not true that all the food items in Juba market are from the neighbouring countries. In fact some of the food items are from Morobo, Kajo Keji and Yei counties except that they reach Juba via Uganda. This is simply because of poor infrastructures in Southern Sudan that fresh vegetables from counties in Southern Sudan find their way to the borders where Ugandan businessmen and women take advantage to ship what are Sudanese produce to Juba. However, to be fair we are not producing as we should because of budgetary constraints and poor infrastructure. Nonetheless to deny agricultural production in Central Equatoria State is not fair. The Ministry is doing its best in the circumstances and will make a difference. Scientists are not usually loud mouths in contrast to politicians but they work in silence behind the scene for the results to speak for themselves.

I share with the public their disapproval of unauthorised slaughter houses multiplying all over the State. The State here may mean Juba metropolis. After having observed some slaughter slabs the hygienic and sanitary conditions may be questionable. I had accompanied the Commissioner of Juba County and the State Minister on a tour of slaughter slabs in and around Juba. There were no slaughter houses but just open grounds full of dirt. It is the Juba County Commissioner to issue a local order to regulate slaughter slabs. However, the Ministry could also draft a bill that could be presented to the State Legislative Assembly to be enacted into law.

In conclusion the state of agriculture in Central Equatoria is not as perceived by the public. Indeed there are difficulties but the negative perception of agriculture does not give the whole picture. The way forward is to appreciate the challenges the agriculture sector faces, analyse the challenges and put forward a comprehensive plan or package. It is not only divisive by apportioning blame but unhelpful in identifying the main causes of poor agricultural production. One main cause is the lip service offered to agriculture as the backbone of the economy of Southern Sudan. Until agriculture takes its proper place as of top priority in development effort, we will continue with the same negative perception of agriculture. It is not the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, Animal Resources and Fisheries in Central Equatoria State that has to carry all the blame for any perceived miserable state of agriculture. To be fair we in Southern Sudan need some soul searching for the best way forward in our current situation of rampant insecurity and corruption which are never good bed fellows with socio-economic development. Insecurity scares people off and corruption robs development of vital resources. Also inefficiency and semi-informed administration of agricultural development as a priority is part of the problem. Timely availability of resources, commitment and efficiency are key factors for success. I hope the public is aware of all this so that the people of agriculture are not singled out for unnecessary blame and name calling for failures in Southern Sudan.

The author is a regular contributor to Sudan Tribune. He is 1st Director General (equivalent to Secretary General of State) of the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, Animal Resources and Fisheries in Central Equatoria State. The author is a food security expert and can be reached at [email protected].