The role of urban agriculture in enhancing household livelihoods in terms of food security : the case of Soweto, Johannesburg

(1)

THE ROLE OF URBAN AGRICULTURE IN ENHANCING

HOUSEHOLD LIVELIHOODS IN TERMS OF FOOD SECURITY

THE CASE OF SOWETO, JOHANNESBURG

by

(2)

Cover Photo: Farmers posing for a picture in front of their spinach produce in an open space garden, Soweto, Johannesburg, South Africa (Photo taken by E. Troumpouki, April 2015).

(3)

Graduate School of Social Sciences, MSc International Development Studies Master Thesis

The role of urban agriculture in enhancing

household livelihoods in terms of food security:

The case of Soweto, Johannesburg, South Africa

Name: Eleni Troumpouki Student number: 10701168

E-Mail: elenatroumpouki@hotmail.com Year of Studies: 2014-2015

(4)

Supervisor

Dr. Nicky R.M. Pouw

Assistant Professor, International Development Studies Graduate School of Social Sciences

University of Amsterdam Nieuwe Achtergracht 166 1018 WV Amsterdam The Netherlands Phone: +31(0)20-5254105 E-mail: n.r.m.pouw@uva.nl http://home.medewerker.uva.nl/n.r.m.pouw/ Second Reader

Dr. Courtney Lake Vegelin

Assistant Professor, International Development Studies Graduate School of Social Sciences

University of Amsterdam Nieuwe Achtergracht 166 1018 WV Amsterdam The Netherlands Phone: +31(0) 20-5255033 E-mail: c.l.vegelin@uva.nl http://home.medewerker.uva.nl/c.l.vegelin/ Local Supervisor Dr Naudé Malan

Senior Lecturer, Development Studies

Faculty of Humanities, Department of Anthropology and Development Studies University of Johannesburg

Kingsway Campus: D Ring 507

Auckland Park 2006, PO Box 524 Johannesburg South Africa

Phone: +27 (0) 11 559 2878 E-mail: nmalan@uj.ac.za

http://www.uj.ac.za/EN/Faculties/humanities/departments/anthrodev/Development-Studies/Development-Studies-Staff/Pages/DrNaud%C3%A9Malan.aspx

(5)

i

To my dad who is a farmer himself,

(6)

ii

Acknowledgments

This thesis signifies the completion of my master’s in International Development studies at the University of Amsterdam and it gives me great pleasure to thank all the people who have contributed in their own ways for that.

First and foremost, I wish to express my sincere appreciation to Dr. Nicky Pouw for her valuable academic guidance from the beginning of this research project. Thank you for your insightful and constructive comments, and for your patience throughout the writing process. It was a privilege and honor for me to have you as a supervisor.

This thesis would not have been possible without the assistance of my local supervisor, Dr. Naude Malan, who as an expert made this fieldwork possible in the first place and introduced me to the reality of agriculture in Soweto. I am humbled by your passion and dedication to helping farmers. You are an inspiration.

I am grateful to Catherine Hunter who warmly welcomed me in her beloved country and provided incredible amount of support during my stay in Johannesburg. Thank you for opening your heart and doors to me. I cherish what I learnt from you.

I would like to thank Prince Cedza Dlamini and his assistant Zulu for their practical support, Shakile, Bongane and Vincent for driving me around Soweto and Richard Devey for helping with the data entry on SPSS.

I thank Dr. Courtney Vegelin, for agreeing to act as a second reader and for encouraging me to keep trying during my struggles in the first semester. Also, I acknowledge and thank Dr. Jacobin Olthoff who helped me in successfully completing my degree with an internship variant and was generous enough to give me the opportunity for an extension.

I express appreciation to my friends who are scattered around the world, my dear family in NY and all those who believe in me. Special thanks to Foteini, Despoina, Julie, Angela, Athena, Marion, Leticia, Tiffany, Monica and Dimitri who have been my support system during this journey.

Lastly, I am indebted to all participants related to this study who gave me their time and input. This research is for the farmers of Soweto and I thank them for sharing their stories and welcoming me in small moments of their lives. They taught me a lot and as I said, I hope that one day I will come back. My deepest gratitude goes to my parents; Panteli and Spiridoula, to my siblings and to my grandparents. I love you.

(7)

List of Tables

Table 1: Age categories of farmers (N=70)……….……39

Table 2: Households monthly income (including social welfare grants), (N=70)………...50

Table 3: Agricultural shocks (N=27, 38% of the sampling population)………...62

Table 4: Challenges in Urban Agriculture, (N=70)……….…….63

Table 5: Reasons for farming interruption (N=19, 27% of the research sample)………...64

Table 6: Food Security, Backyards (own garden), N=14……….65

Table 7: Food Security, NGO gardens, (N=14)………..66

Table 8: Food Security, School gardens, (N=14)………..……66

Table 9: Food Security, Open space gardens, (N=14)………..67

Table 10: Food Security, Larger scale gardens, (N=14)………..67

(11)

vi

List of figures

Figure 1: Sustainable Livelihoods Framework………..11

Figure 2: Livelihood Assets Pentagon………..13

Figure 3: Regional Map of Johannesburg……….……20

Figure 4: Regional Map of Soweto………..….22

Figure 5: Higher food prices in relation to food expenditure across South-African households……….26

Figure 6: Conceptual scheme………...30

Figure 7: Activities of household members (N=186) ………..38

(12)

vii

List of Photographs

Photograph 1: Female elder farmer in a school garden, Soweto………40 Photograph 2: Female farmer watering her crop by using public standpipe in a school garden, Soweto……….44 Photograph 3: Farmer showing his organic produce in an NGO garden, Soweto………....46 Photograph 4: Wood waste used for soil fertility in an open space garden, Soweto……….46 Photograph 5: Anti-Wrinkle oil and mouth rinse produced organically at a medicinal garden in school properties, Soweto………..…..47 Photograph 6: Farmers taking a break by the food storage, provided by the “Joburg Market” larger scale garden, Soweto………..49 Photograph 7: Region D Farmer’s Forum (RDFF) meeting, Soweto ………52

Photograph 8: Farmers socializing at an open space garden, Soweto………54 Photograph 9: Food market with unhealthy food products (candies, chips etc.) by the road, Soweto…..57

Photograph 10: Farmer in a greenhouse, open space garden, Soweto……….58 Photographs 11, 12, 13: Shade net tunnels in an NGO garden, Soweto………59 Photographs 14, 15: Farmers collecting spinach from tire containers, open space garden, Soweto………60

(13)

viii

List of Abbreviations

ANC African National Congress CoJ City of Johannesburg CPR Common Pool Resources

DAFF Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries DoA Department of Agriculture

DSD Design Society Development

FADA Faculty of Arts, Design and Architecture FANTA Food and Nutrition Technical Assistance

FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations GBC Global Business Coalition

GIS Geographic Information System IFSS Integrated Food Security Strategy NDP National Development Plan NGO Non-Governmental Organization NP National Party

RDFF Region D Farmers Forum SA South Africa

SIM Soweto Imvelo Market UA Urban Agriculture

UJ University of Johannesburg WHC Wits Health Consortium

WITS University of the Witwatersrand ZAR South-African Rands

(14)

ix

Abstract

1

Discourses on the rapid growth of cities in the developing world stress the dire need for more sustainable urban food systems. Urban agriculture is featured as an emerging topic of development as it can provide a significant source of fresh produce for poor urban populations. Yet, existing literature shows that is ambivalent whether it can be addressed as a major contributor to household food security or not. Considering the critical condition of food insecurity in South Africa, this thesis sets to find out, if urban agriculture constitutes an important source of livelihoods by substantially improving household food security in Soweto, Johannesburg.

In order to study that, a combination of qualitative and quantitative methodology was employed. Initially, observations were undertaken and five different types of gardens were identified in the region. People farm in backyards, NGO gardens, school gardens, open space gardens and larger scale gardens. By drawing on the sustainable livelihoods framework and using survey methodology, the study examines the farmer’s livelihood assets, the risks and challenges related to the activity and the patterns of food security. Interviews, along with document examination were carried out with the intention to collect data on the policy context.

The findings show that there are not significant differences between the five groups and that urban agriculture does not substantially improve the household livelihoods in terms of food security. Research participants repeatedly reported that they do not have access to basic infrastructure (land, good irrigation systems, fencing) and tools. Their main challenges are that they lack the resources they need to carry out agricultural activities and they do not have enough support from the government and institutions.

These obstacles substantiate that urban agriculture is not a mean to tackle food insecurity in the township as the food produce does not meet the household’s needs. The majority of farmers call for financial support, access to training courses and viable actions from authorities. The study finds that although policy implications indicate that urban agriculture is perceived as a development vehicle, there is a complication in regard to effective implementation on the ground.

1

(15)

This research may possibly offer added value in societal terms as the information gathered gives insight into the nature of food insecurity in Soweto. Subsequently, it can provide scientific contribution which could further facilitate initiatives by policy makers and development practitioners who operate in the area.

Key Words:

Urban Agriculture Household Livelihoods Food Security Soweto

(16)

1

Chapter 1

Introduction

“In a world of plenty, no-one - not a single person - should go hungry”

-UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon2 1.1 Research Problem

“… Urban poverty tends to be fueled by people migrating towards the cities in an attempt to escape the deprivations associated with rural livelihoods. Partly due to the rural decline, the world is urbanizing at a fast pace and it will not be long before a greater part of developing country populations is living in large cities”, Jacques Diouf (FAO, 2006:5). According to the UN Population Division (Department of Economic and Social Affairs, 2009), the world’s population is estimated to reach 9 billion people by 2050, while the United Nations Population Fund (2007) predicts that the population living in urban areas is projected to increase from 3.3 billion that was in 2007 to 6.4 billion in 2050. The same study (UNFPA, 2007) reveals that approximately 45 per cent of poor populations in rural Africa will move to cities by 2020.

Big cities face several challenges in meeting the needs of their people as rapid population growth increases poverty and food demand. Crush and Frayne (2010a) confirm that in the case of South Africa, urbanization has caused an “invisible crisis” of urban food security. Given that projections show that people will be leaving rural areas in order to pursue better living conditions in cities and that poverty and food insecurity are intrinsically associated, this research will take place in a fast growing city, Johannesburg, South Africa. According to a Poverty and Livelihood survey in Johannesburg, 41% of the households in the poorest wards of all seven administrative regions, are severely food insecure (De Wet et al., 2008.21).

Moreover, food and nutrition security is associated to the world economy and any threat to the food supply is essential. The global food crisis in 2008 (see section 3.4), adversely affected the South African population as it “raised the cost of foods, making it increasingly difficult for low-income households to afford their pre-crisis food baskets” (Jacobs, 2012:1).

2

(17)

2

In this context, urban agriculture (UA) appears to be a pro-poor strategy. There is an extensive body of literature which supports this statement; however empirical studies on its potential scenario as an urban development tactic in the research area are under–researched. Furthermore, recent study from Frayne et al (2014) on the contribution of UA in household food security in South African cities revealed that there is limited evidence that agricultural strategies are effective.

1.2 Research Aims and Objectives

According to FAO’s first status report on Urban and Peri-urban Horticulture (UPH), cultivating in hortus (garden), provided food to over 22 million people in Africa’s cities, and therefore constitutes a principal factor in increasing food supply and income (FAO 2012). Based on this statement, the FAO (2012) claims that UPH has the potential to spread out and assist the continent to accomplish “zero hunger”, providing that an enabling and supportive environment will be created by institutions. Additionally, urban farming is beneficial not only on a personal level (consuming goods directly from the garden which can be healthier than conventional food and pesticides-free), but also on community level, as the residents use homegrown food and therefore decrease their carbon footprint.

This research project examines urban agriculture as a livelihood strategy for urban dwellers who cultivate in backyards, school gardens, NGO gardens, open space gardens or larger scale gardens. The study is conducted in Soweto, (one of the most disadvantaged areas in Johannesburg, see section 3.2), where poverty is tenacious and most of the residents live in informal settlements, facing several problems as unemployment, no-access to education etc. (CoJ)3.

The primary purpose of the study is to explore the role of agriculture in an urban environment as a strategy to tackle food insecurity practiced by agriculture practitioners in Soweto. Therefore I evaluate the way that the latter use and sustain existing livelihood capitals in order to achieve better livelihoods and particularly food security. The odds are that when a person is capable of combining the range of livelihood assets, ensures better livelihood outcomes. The scope of the study is exploratory and explanatory thus my hope is that it will provide a better understanding of the needs of farmers in Soweto and the factors that encourage or hinder their participation in UA. The dissemination of these findings can potentially contribute on future development and planning of strategies in the township.

3

(18)

3 1.3 Thesis Outline

This thesis is composed of eight chapters. The first chapter is exploratory and introduces the subject of the study by giving a general perspective of the research problem and by mentioning the research objective. In the second chapter, the main theoretical aspects that concern urban agriculture and food security are discussed by making use of a broad literature review and drawing on the Sustainable Livelihoods Approach, which is the theory used for analyzing the research findings. The third chapter describes the context of the study, by referring to political and socio-economic characteristics of South Africa and the research location. Chapter four outlines the methodological considerations of the study and subsequently discusses the research methods and instruments used for data collection and analysis. Chapter five, six and seven discuss the empirical findings and answer the first, second and third research sub-questions respectively. The thesis ends with chapter eight, which amalgamates the key discussions, forms the conclusion and gives recommendations for further policymaking and research.

(19)

4

Chapter 2

Literature Review and Theoretical Framework

This chapter first explains the concept of food security and secondly outlines the definition of urban agriculture and presents opinions conferring its potential contribution to development. Subsequently, it refers to the reasons that motivate farmers to engage with agriculture. The chapter gives special attention to the main theory that designates the research, the Sustainable Livelihood Approach. Particularly, it focuses on the Livelihoods Assets Pentagon and the structures and processes related to food security which are main components of the Sustainable Livelihood Framework and profoundly associated with the exploratory nature of the thesis.

2.1 The concept of food security

Food is an immediate requirement for people’s survival hence, the existence of healthy and sustainable food systems is imperative. The United Nations (UN) recognized the “Right to food” in the Declaration of Human Rights in 1948 and has since noted that it is vital for the enjoyment of all other rights (Eide, 1999)4. In 2000, the UN introduced in its Millennium Summit, a global action plan consisted of eight anti-poverty goals, the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) that were set to be achieved by year 2015. The first goal5 is focused on the “eradication of extreme hunger and poverty”, and has as one of its targets to “halve the proportion of people who suffer from hunger”. The MDG report6 discloses that “the proportion of undernourished people in the developing regions has fallen by almost half since 1990, from 23.3 per cent in 1990–1992 to 12.9 per cent in 2014–2016”.

Food security stands on top of international development agendas. It is a much debated concept which has about 200 definitions in published writings (Maxwell and Smith, 1992). The definition of the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) for food security highlights that it "exists when all people, at all times, have physical and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food to meet their dietary

4

United Nations Committee on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (1999). The right to adequate food. Geneva: United Nations.

5

http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/poverty.shtml

6

(20)

5

needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life"(FAO, 1996) 7.This concept is based on the following “pillars:

1) Food availability: sufficient quantities of food available on a consistent basis.

2) Food access: having sufficient resources to obtain appropriate foods for a nutritious diet.

3) Food use: appropriate use based on knowledge of basic nutrition and care, as well as adequate water and sanitation” (World Health Organization, n.d.)8.

In addition, a more updated definition has emerged over the past decade. In 2012, the UN System Standing Committee on Nutrition Secretariat together with the Committee on World Food Security Secretariat guided the process of the latest’s Task Team on Terminology through a consultative process. The Task Team elaborated a draft document9 “Coming to terms with terminology” where they suggest to move towards a more all-encompassing terminology for food and nutrition security so the conceptual links between food security and nutrition security could be replicated. More particularly, the Committee recognized as appropriate, the following definition of “food and nutrition security”:

“Food and nutrition security exists when all people at all times have physical, social and economic access to food, which is safe and consumed in sufficient quantity and quality to meet their dietary needs and food preferences, and is supported by an environment of adequate sanitation, health services and care, allowing for a healthy and active life” (FAO,2012:2).Moreover, food and nutrition security involves the availability of “culturally adapted food”, meaning that not only western food is accessible but socially desirable food as well (Noack and Pouw, 2014:6).

“Food security cannot be understood in isolation from other developmental questions such as social protection, sources of income, rural and urban development, changing household structures, health, access to land, water and inputs, retail markets, or education and nutritional knowledge”(HSRC, 2009:8).

7

Food and Agriculture Organization (November 1996) “Rome Declaration on Food Security and World Food Summit Plan of Action, Rome FAO”.

8_{http://www.who.int/trade/glossary/story028/en/} 9

http://www.fao.org/fsnforum/sites/default/files/file/Terminology/MD776(CFS___Coming_to_terms_with_Termi nology).pdf

(21)

6

In this research, the extent that the study sample is food secure is examined by the use of a survey which is adopted by the Household Food Insecurity Access Scale (HFIAS) for Measurement of Food Access: Indicator Guide constructed by the Food and Nutrition Technical Assistance (FANTA10). Farmers were supposed to indicate if they can relate to the questions with a recall period of 30 days. The questions posed are nine and they are divided in three categories. They express, “anxiety and uncertainty about the household food supply, insufficient quality which includes variety and preferences of the type of food, insufficient food intake and its physical consequences” (Coates et al., 2007:5). If farmers have responded positively in a question, meaning that the situation described applies to them, then they were asked to specify if that event “has happened rarely (once or twice), sometimes (three to ten times) or often (more than ten times) during their recall period (30 days)” (Coates et al., 2007:4) Food security is further explored in section 6.5.

Besides that, the reliance of food and nutrition security on healthy, sustainable and socially accepted food systems has encouraged people to grow their own (preferred) crops and to improve their food sources. Urban agriculture (UA) which is a central concept of this research is “the practice of cultivating, processing and distributing food in, or around (peri-urban), a town or city” (Bailkey and Nasr, 2000:6) and is introduced in the following section.

2.2 Definition of Urban Agriculture

This section makes use of literature review with the intention to give a definition of urban agriculture (UA), a principal focus of the research, and to describe its relevant aspects. However, there is no prevailing agreement regarding the precise definition, due to the broad variety of strategies and factors which influence it. The wide spectrum of opinions and the dearth of consensus reveal the complexity of the topic.

“Urban agricultural systems include horticulture, floriculture, forestry, aquaculture, and livestock production” (Mougeot, 2000:1). It is “any activity associated with growing of crops and some form of livestock rearing in or very near cities for local consumption, either by producers themselves or by others where the food is marketed” (Rees, 1997:1).

10

(22)

7

Urban agriculture has been an essential component that contributes to local urban economies from ancient times. “Throughout most of mankind's history and in different civilizations, urban populations have engaged to variable extents in producing at least some of the food they require, close to or at their own residence, within or just outside the city”( Mougeout, 1994:5). For instance, “the Neolithic Egyptian settlement of Knossos developed mixed farming (wheat, barley, lentils, sheep, goats, pigs and some cattle); the Minoan town spread over 75' hectares, Knossos had isolated farms on its edge” (Rodenbeck, 1991: 124, 129 in Mougeot 1994:2).

Mbiba (1998) states that urban farming involves urban cultivation and livestock rearing on specific urban areas that are formally prearranged for that purpose by authorities, it may take place in zones between the residential areas and municipal frontiers. More particularly, Mougeot (in Kadenyeka et al 2013:1) gives the following definition: “Urban agriculture is an industry located within (intra-urban) or on the fringe (peri-urban) of a town, city, or metropolis, which grows and raises, processes and distributes a diversity of food and non-food products, (re-) using largely human and material resources, products and services found in and around that urban area, and in turn supplying human and material resources, products and services largely to that urban area.” Premat (2005:157) extends Mougeot’s explanation by adding to it that the activities can be also “in a settlement and are independently or collectively developed by people for self-consumption or commercialization purposes”.

Occasionally, urban food systems do not solely generate benefits related to food consumption, income generation and poverty alleviation. They may encompass green space creation, environmental awareness, community participation, leisure and joy (Reuther and Dewar 2006:99). Likewise, Bakker et al. (2000) view UA as a medium to create productive urban spaces and to manage urban waste and water resources more efficiently.

This research defines urban agriculture as the practice of farming which takes place in built-up and peri-urban areas in the township of Soweto, it is either “on-plot or off-plot agriculture” (Rogerson,1996). According to van der Ploeg (2003:111), “a farming style is a coherent set of strategic notions about the way in which farming is practiced”. Five farming styles are distinguished and include gardens in houses, school or NGOs premises, public land (open space gardens), or larger scale projects (located at the outskirts). The backyards are usually small in scale whereas the other types cover a larger productive site that is utilized by many gardeners. The use of modern technologies is limited and farmers make ingenious usage of accessible assets. Crop production was observed in tire containers, shade net tunnels, greenhouses, and hydroponics tunnels (see section 6.2).

(23)

8 2.3 Views expressed on Urban Agriculture

The literature review designates several theoretical stances; scholars condemn, recognize or have more nuanced views regarding the benefits that have emerged from UA. The stance that rejects its merits is related to the idea that the activity is associated with rural environments and it does not fit in an urban context, it seems to be an “oxymoron” (UNDP, 1996). Bentick (2000) claims that rural migration is the cause that agriculture is witnessed in an urban context and it implies relocation of rural poverty to the urban setting (Devereux, 1993). In addition, this approach perceives that agriculture “is too dirty for the wealth and glory of the city as it is associated with the theory of peasant cities painting a picture of permanent poverty in the Third World Countries cities” (Jonga, 2013:1). Foeken (2008:226) argues that, it is not legally regulated in most African cities due to the fact that it is rejected by the “western approach” which implies that UA detracts from the picture of a modern city as it is not properly incorporated in what is connoted as progressive and “urban”. Similarly, Mbiba (1995:2) claims that it is prohibited in many countries as is unsuitable in an urban environment and it infringes urban planning laws. In Addis Ababa for example it “is administratively unwanted” and “has racist and colonial connotation” (Jonga, 2013:7, 11). Given these positions, it is contradictory to the advanced transition from traditional to modern societies and it is not associated with the stages of growth where there is a requirement for shift from agrarian to industrial societies (Rostow, 1960).

In another set of debate, scholars point out more supportive arguments in favor of UA’s efficiency. Urban farming has manifold advantages, “for the poorest of the poor, it provides good access to food. For the stable poor, it provides a source of income and good quality food at low cost. For middle-income families, it offers the possibility of savings and a return on their investment in urban property. For small and large entrepreneurs, it is a profitable business” (UNDP, 1996:4). Redwood (2009: 230) stresses that it can meet food consumption needs when practiced at a small scale without including a broad variety of goods and it can serve as “a mean to supplement the diet with safe food”. However, it “is unlikely to turn any city or most households fully self-sufficient in all of the food which they may require” (Mougeot, 2000: 32).

Additionally, it improves access to nutritious food, particularly for children and those who belong to vulnerable groups with low or no-income (Ruel et al., 1999, Nugent, 2000). It is an emerging strategy that boosts local economic growth, for instance, in Dar es Salaam and Lusaka it operates as a tactic for poverty reduction since the past two decades (Smit and Nasr, 1992). Another essential feature is that UA

(24)

9

encourages social integration of marginalized groups, particularly women (Dubbeling et al., 2010) as it is an “avenue for social and economic empowerment” (Hovorka, 2006:51). Maxwell (1998), on a study in Kampala finds that UA that takes place in a home garden favors maternal care as mothers have more time to devote to their children in comparison to what they would have if doing other kinds of jobs.

Armar-Klemesu (2000) argues that marginalized groups that practice UA stop depending on others for food provision and eat more vegetables than non-urban farmers and better-off groups. Likewise, Van Veenhuizen and Danso (2009) claim, the households which grow and consume some of their own food attain food security and better nutrition to a greater extent than those which have analogous socio-economic status but are not engaged with urban farming.

Starr (2000) suggests that UA is an immense strategy that supports local food production and disapproves compliance to corporate global food systems. It provides a substantial amount of earnings (Zezza et al., 2010) and creates an “opportunity cost” as gardeners save income by consuming home produced food which is expensive to afford in the shop and generate income by selling their produce (Stewart et al., 2013). Moreover, it enhances the urban environment as it has ecological functions (Godfray, et al., 2010) and mitigates city pollution through the photosynthetic process, which absorbs carbon dioxide and releases oxygen (Howorth, 2001). However, if not managed in a sustainable way and makes use of hazardous chemicals and genetic modifications it can cause risks like soil and groundwater contamination (Deelstra et al., 2000).

2.4 Motivation for engagement in UA

Thornton (2008) claims that, UA is beneficial given that its practitioners are fully motivated to be productive and take constant care of their garden. Foeken et al (2004:2) claim that the two most important reasons that urban people in Sub-Saharan Africa cultivate, are because it is a “survival strategy” and it “subsidizes the income”.

There is an extensive literature which asserts that UA is a dynamic concept for development and acknowledges its virtue as a poverty relief method. Young people engage with agriculture because they see it as a way to uplift themselves (see section 5.1). On the contrary, in rural areas where the job opportunities are even scarcer, young people often turn away from agriculture due to lack of access to

(25)

10

land and interest in urban migration (Berckmoes and White, 2014;, Bezu and Holden, 2014; White, 2012).

“For women who are not sufficiently empowered to prevent or act against rape or violent crimes, gardening appears to be a response to the pressure and powerlessness they feel. They are motivated to go to their gardens to reassure and reassert themselves, and re-establish their identity as women and their sense of self-worth”( Slater 2001: 642). In addition, studies demonstrate that women comprise the majority of farmers in an urban setting which is justified from their need to feed their families, empower themselves and earn better livelihoods (Devereux et al, 2001; Hovorka et al, 2009). As Jacobi states, female farmers “render more benefits for the household because the produce is either directly consumed in the family or the income obtained is spent on the basic needs of the family” (Jacobi et al, 1999:272). Bruinsma and Hertog (2003), highlight that opportunities for food production encourage women especially when they sell their food and are the ones in charge of the earnings of the sales.

The motivations and generally the positive outcomes that vulnerable households attain from urban agriculture are numerous and essential and are further being explored in the empirical discussion. Nevertheless the completion of the practice is subject to the extent that UA is supported by capital endowments and effective policy structures. Next section will elaborate on this crucial part.

2.5 The Sustainable Livelihoods Approach

This section describes the main theoretical framework that guides the research. The Sustainable Livelihoods Approach is a suitable theory for it because it is people-centered and focuses on how people combine the capital assets that enable them to sustain or enhance their livelihoods. It puts emphasis on the way that people operate in vulnerable contexts in order to escape their poverty condition.

“A livelihood comprises the capabilities, assets (including both material and social resources) and activities for a means of living. A livelihood is sustainable when it can cope with and recover from stresses and shocks maintain or enhance its capabilities and assets, while not undermining the natural resource base.” Adapted from Chamber and Conway 1992 (cited in Scoones, 2009:175)

Accordingly, the purpose of the study is to look at the contribution of urban agriculture to household livelihoods enhancement in terms of food security, through an assessment of the available assets that

(26)

11

farmers possess (see section 2.4.2) and the existing urban policy context (national, provincial, local policies which aim to promote UA).

2.5.1 The Sustainable Livelihoods Framework

The framework below (see Figure1) outlines that, within a vulnerability context, individuals have access to certain assets of different nature: human, natural, financial, social and physical. These assets can be combined to produce livelihood strategies, which are “open to people in pursuit of beneficial livelihood outcomes that meet their own livelihood objectives” (DFID, 1999, Section 1.1, para.3). Accordingly, a livelihood comprises the activities needed for a means of living and is sustainable when it can cope with and recover from shocks, maintain or enhance its capabilities and assets and provide sustainable opportunities for next generations.

Figure 1: Sustainable Livelihoods Framework

Source: Practicalaction.org

Subsequently, vulnerability refers to exterior hazards and for that reason, the capability of the individual, household or community to overcome them and stay resilient is of a paramount importance.

(27)

12

Poverty is a historically based condition in Soweto which simultaneously implies vulnerability, as after the apartheid regime, high populations moved to informal settlements without having the opportunity to access services and to improve their livelihoods. Furthermore, agriculture itself is a practice which is susceptible to shocks (droughts, floods) and seasonality and trends, hence climatic conditions are critically relevant to vulnerability context. Walker et al (2004:2) define resilience as “the buffer capacity or the ability of a system to absorb perturbations, or the magnitude of disturbance that can be absorbed before a system changes its structure by changing the variables and processes that control behavior”. Next section refers to the Livelihood Assets Pentagon, which comprises capital endowments that endorse farmer’s capacity to attain better livelihoods by undertaking agricultural activities.

2.5.2 The Livelihoods Assets Pentagon

The Livelihoods Assets Pentagon is fundamental part of the livelihoods framework, within the vulnerability context. The asset pentagon embodies the weaknesses and the strengths in terms of assets that households or communities possess and combine in order to create viable strategies and further accomplish livelihood objectives. The strength of all assets is very crucial when it comes to strategies that people have to take and any weak part of one or more capitals impedes the accomplishment of the livelihood outcomes.

The Livelihood Framework Guidance Sheets states that: “the general principle is that those who are amply endowed with assets are more likely to be able to make positive livelihood choices. That is, they will be choosing from a range of options in order to maximize their achievement of positive livelihood outcomes, rather than being forced into any given strategy because it is their only option” (DfID, 1999, Section 2.5, para.7).For instance, a farmer who has adequate access to land (natural capital), may not only use it as a productive space for himself/herself but lease a part of it or raise cattle. In that way the farmer accomplishes better livelihood outcomes by improving his/her financial capital. Given that the farmer is sufficiently endowed with these capitals, he/she might want to generate the social capital and assist the community by creating stronger relationships with its members (trust, cooperation, assistance, exchange).

In the case of Soweto, I examine whether the livelihood assets and the capability of dwellers to undertake farming strategies are vital factors for the improvement of their wellbeing. Thus, it is important to describe the main characteristics of the five capitals that form the livelihood assets pentagon within the Sustainable Livelihoods Framework.

(28)

13 Figure 2: Livelihood Assets Pentagon

Source: DFID guidance sheets (1999)

Human Capital

Human capital is associated with the labor (amount and quality of work), which is highly dependent on training, education, skills and health status (DfID, 1999). Human capital is one of the most essential assets as it enables people to make use of the other assets. It is ‘necessary, though not on its own sufficient, for the achievement of positive livelihood outcomes’ (DfID,1999, Section 2.3.1,para.3). Respectively, during the study, respondents provided information about their health condition, their education level and their involvement with urban agriculture activities.

Social Capital

This capital is mainly referred to the social resources and networks that the individual and the community use for developing livelihood strategies. Networks are more formalized groups and are described by the relationships of trust, reciprocity and exchanges (DfID, 1999). Likewise, “cooperatives are essential in mobilizing farmers, providing assistance, securing resources, providing inputs and local knowledge, and even participating in urban agriculture campaigns” (Schmidt, 2011:6 ). The social capital is important in the sense that it enables cooperation as well as the management of common resources and shared infrastructure (DfID, 1999). In an argument about common pool resources (CPR), Ostrom et al (1999:279 ), claim that users fall into four categories, “those who always behave in a narrow, self-interested way and never cooperate, those who are unwilling to cooperate with others unless assured

(29)

14

that they will not be exploited by free riders, those who are willing to initiate reciprocal cooperation in the hopes that others will return their trust; and perhaps a few genuine altruists who always try to achieve higher returns for a group”.

In the same way as the previous capital, it is very likely to be vital for the attainment of food security as a livelihood outcome. This stands because I assume that relations of trust and mutual support, cooperatives, exchange, networking etc. are immediately related to livelihoods dependency.

Natural Capital

Natural capital refers to the natural resources “stocks from which resource flows and services (e.g. nutrient cycling, erosion protection) useful for livelihoods are derived” (DfID,1999, Section 2.3.3, para.1). These include ‘from intangible public goods such as the atmosphere and biodiversity to divisible assets used directly for production (trees, land, etc.)’ (DfID,1999, Section 2.3.3, para.1). Considering that, information regarding the availability of land, the productivity of the plot, the type of soil that the cultivators have access to, along with water access and quality were reported.

Physical capital

Physical capital involves the availability of basic infrastructure and producer goods. Infrastructure ‘consist of changes to the physical environment that help people to meet their basic needs and to be more productive’, (DfID,1999, Section 2.3.4, para.1). As far as the producer goods are concerned, they represent ‘the tools and equipment that people use to function more productively’, which are commonly privately owned (DfID,1999, Section 2.3.4, para.1). This capital is closely related with the financial capital among others. Being in a good financial condition in order to have access to the infrastructure and producer goods is vital as ‘richer groups use their strength and influence to control or monopolize access’ (DfID,1999, Section 2.3.4, para.12). Correspondingly, the access of farmers to good infrastructure, inputs, technology and innovations was reviewed as well.

Financial Capital

Financial capital includes the monetary resources with which people are enabled to undertake livelihood strategies to achieve positive outcomes. Monetary resources often depend on the quality of employment, savings, pensions, endowments, loans and generally money flow, thus evidence about farmer’s financial condition is underlined.

(30)

15

In a similar approach, Sen (2001) envisages that development is human rather than national economic development as people experience poverty because they lack the basic capabilities and freedom to attain the “functionings” (achievements) they value. Thus, I examine if, and in what way the use of livelihood capitals enables urban agriculture practitioners to accomplish their “functionings” and ensure their survival. A thorough deliberation regarding the human, social, natural, physical and financial capitals that are available to the research sample is presented in chapter 5.

Last but not least, the access to capitals is determined through interventions which are carried out by transforming structures and processes. The following section elaborates on that.

2.6 Transforming Structures and Processes

This part of the framework represents the policy-making bodies and the institutions which influence livelihood assets and livelihood outcomes. “Responsive political structures that implement pro-poor policies, including extending social services into the areas in which the poor live, can significantly increase people’s sense of well-being. They can promote awareness of rights and a sense of self-control and they can also help reduce vulnerability through the provision of social safety nets” (DfID 1999, Section 2.4, para 10).

Considering that several factors influence people's ability to pursue a sustainable choice of livelihood, food security strategies have to be promoted and fully integrated on urban planning. Procedures of organizations and regulatory bodies that operate on different levels and scopes from local to global have the ability to either uplift or impede people’s wellbeing. The degree of vulnerability of an individual or community depends profoundly on the existing structure of governance and the assistance that they get from different institutions.

In the same way, according to Sen (2001), a key challenge for development involves addressing the gap between “unprecedented opulence” and “remarkable deprivation”. Given that people are deprived, managing food insecurity is a key challenge for the policies and development practices employed by municipalities, national governments and prominent organizations. Stewart et al (2013), refers that big development institutions show positivity for the impending promises of UA through the schemes that they undertake. Likewise, Crush and Frayne (2010) note that, multilateral institutions, donors and governments support that the way out of food insecurity in Africa depends on essential assistance and enormous contributions to small-scale food production.

(31)

16

In general, “the broad method of the Sustainable Livelihoods Approach has been applied to a wide range of fields, e.g. fisheries, health, forestry, agriculture and urban development, among others “(Scoones, 2009:179). Given the above mentioned matters, major concepts of this framework are suitably used to guide the study of urban food production and food security in Soweto. UA in gardens and private plots is assessed as strategy of livelihood where dwellers shape the urban environment by using assets. The availability of these assets and the livelihood strategies that they enforce, regulate to what extent food security is attained as the major and optimum outcome. At the same time, the current sustainable or unsustainable executions of policies and initiatives have a profound effect on farmers’ access to assets. 2.7 Concluding Remarks

The chapter explained the role of urban agriculture as a noteworthy trend which contributes to household food security by drawing on literature review. Considering that farmers who practice the activity are likely to be less vulnerable to poverty strains, this study delineates UA’s execution. The thesis is grounded in the Sustainable Livelihood Approach and builds on urban agriculture as a stimulant for food security enhancement. The theoretical departure points aim to examine this by giving a comprehensive perspective on farmer’s capacity, how the farmers manage to make use of what is needed for accomplishing sustainable livelihoods. The theory directs the research in a way which includes the crucial points that necessitate to be evaluated, the capital endowments that are at farmers’ disposal and the underlying livelihood structures that allow the access to these assets. UA as a strategy for food security attainment is thoroughly discussed on the data analysis chapters (5, 6, and 7).

(32)

17

Chapter 3

Context

After drawing on the theoretical foundations that are applied on the thesis, this chapter aims to present the context in which UA is undertaken in Soweto, South Africa. The information is collected by secondary data. First, the chapter discusses the demographic characteristics of the country, city, and township and at the same time gives attention to historical features (principally during the apartheid epoch) and to poverty facts. Secondly, it refers to the global food price crisis which has affected the country’s food security. Third, it focuses in the national policy agenda related to UA and is followed by the concluding remarks.

3.1 Overview of South Africa

South Africa, (or the Republic of South Africa, RSA), is a country located in Southern Africa and it is the 25th largest country in the world. Its population reaches nearly 52 million, of which the 79, 2% represents black South Africans. White South Africans, descendants of European colonizers (mostly from the Netherlands, Britain, France and Germany, only represent a small portion of the population, making up 8.9%, while the rest 11, 9% are colored and Indian or Asian populations (Census 2011).

As previously mentioned, the global population grows rapidly and the majority of the demographic increase is in cities. In SA more than 60% of the total population lives in an urban environment (Frayne et al, 2010:10). Urbanization does not imply better incomes and improved quality of life in the Southern African countries, something that happens in some other developing regions (Ravillon et al, 2007). Similarly, Pauw (2007) refers that it is categorized as an upper-middle income state, but it is also positioned among the countries with high levels of income inequality and poverty.

Nevertheless, Waugh (2000) refers that South Africa can be described as a newly industrialized country. The country has important regional influence and generally it is recognized as middle power in the global proscenium.

As for its chronological features, SA is a country which has been affected directly by the European domination upon African societies, trade slavery, wars and racial violence that led to new political formations. The historical struggles of the country give mounting evidences to the intractable problems that South Africans face today. Several problems originate from the period of apartheid (1948-1994)

(33)

18

when the National Party (NP), which was the ruling government, represented by white South Africans imposed a social and political policy of segregation and discrimination where citizens were categorized in four groups according to race, "black", "white", "colored", and "Indian". Predominantly, black South Africans suffered from oppression and injustice however South Africa’s development was influenced significantly from it.

The rapid growth that the country experienced in the 20th century steered to the transformation of an agrarian society to one which enters commodity markets, advances its industries, extends its mining and develops larger scale food production (Department of Agriculture, 2002:18). Black South Africans were providing cheap labor, and white industrialists were getting richer, resulting to enormously squalid living conditions for the black population. This “separate development”, marked among others the exit from the paternalist food aid relief system of the colonization and the transition to a system of white supremacy where food provision becomes limited for marginalized populations (Koch, 2011:2). This deprivation led to large-scale hunger even though the National Party was often disapproving the presence of famine (Wylie, 2001).

The “separate development” changed over the course of years. The extensive violation of human rights, included police brutality, the implementation of land acts which enforced removals of black South Africans to informal settlements, their limited access to services and work unions, the prohibition of their political rights, the establishment of separate public facilities, the prohibited marriage between black and white citizens and other discriminatory practices. The lack of access to health, education and social services, the creation of homelands (bantustan11) which enforces the black population to abide by the new land acts and not to move out of their boundaries to seek work opportunities and the overall system resulted to severe deprivations.

The situation caused a major international distress. Hundreds of protests in South Africa along with the struggle of anti-apartheid revolutionary politician, Nelson Mandela who was imprisoned for 27 years by the ruling party, drew attention to the international community and the movement against subjugation went global. Countries showed their support by imposing political, diplomatic, technological and scientific sanctions (Brewer, 1989:38). The UN Security Council contributed to the fight against apartheid

11

Also known as black homeland or Bantu homeland. The term Bantu means “people” and refers to black South Africans. It has racial connotation as it was a derogatory term imposed to by the white minority party. Although in other countries in central, east and southern Africa the term refers to ethnic groups without any pejorative allegation.

(34)

19

by creating awareness and calling all state members to impose among others, an embargo on the sale and shipment of arms to South Africa (Reddy, n.d).

The trade embargo led to national economic recession and subsequently the government could not uphold its regime of legalized racial segregation. The end of apartheid era is marked by the victory of the African National Congress (ANC), under Nelson Mandela (who was released in 1990 after international campaigns), in democratic elections in 1994.

After the abolition of apartheid, “a history marked by brutally enforced inequalities appeared to have been ruptured, enabling the black majority to pass through portals beyond which lay equality, dignity and freedom” (Marais, 2001:2). The hopes of South-Africans for democracy “would respond to their legitimate aspirations of a better life, that it would be synonymous with freedom from hunger, want, disease…for the poor, democracy will substantially reduce inequalities along racial and gender lines, decrease poverty, increase access to basic social services and physical infrastructure (Centre for Policy Studies, 2007:11)

The new democratic government has contributed significantly on the political and economic reconstruction of the country but despite the considerable implementation of development plans the nation has high unemployment rates. The situation is unfavorable for large populations, which are still stricken by poverty and are unable to meet their household needs. (Labadarios, 2009). The penetrating violations and the social and economic exclusion increased poverty rates and food insecurity (Labadarios et al., 2009: 11). The Department of Agriculture (2002) refers that food insecurity was not a major challenge before apartheid.

Altman (2009) highlights that attaining better food security is one of the main elements of poverty alleviation. In addition, Bryant (1998:11) notes that: “The government emphasis on increasing production as a response to hunger is limited, since a substantial part of the problem is that poor people cannot afford to purchase the food they need.” This concern was stressed more during the global food crisis in 2008 (see section 3.4), as the soaring food prices affected South Africa’s poor and called for more adequate food production on a local level.

Household food insecurity is prevailing reaching high percentages. In line with the DoA (2002), it was found to be 50%, according to Labadarios et al. (2009) it was 52%, while according to Jacobs (2009), it was 80%. According to a study of the Human Sciences Research Council (in Ndhleve et al., 2013:1) “about 14 per cent of the population in S.A is estimated to be vulnerable to food insecurity, and 25 per

(35)

20

cent of children under the age of six are reckoned to have had their development stunted by malnutrition”. Moreover, Crush et al. (2010) emphasize that the consumption of an assortment of healthy food is exclusively essential in view of the high number of the AIDs cases in South Africa.

Essa et al. (2003) assert that, the effects of political, economic, social and historical dynamics influenced critically the agricultural sector. In this context, urban agriculture is being promoted as a way to mitigate the persistent and growing urban poverty and food insecurity in SA. Almost 20% of South Africans practice agriculture in order to supplement household food items (Crush and Frayne, 2010). Country studies show that there is a linkage between urban farming and access to healthier food and income increase (Richards and Taylor, 2012, Centre for Development Support, 2009).

3.2 City’s profile: Johannesburg

Johannesburg (also known as Jozi or Joburg among others and abbreviated as JHB) is the economic hub of South Africa and the Southern African region generally. In a list of principal agglomerations in the world it ranks as the 40th and it has been described as one of only two “Global Cities” in the continent (Beaverstock et al, 1999).

Figure 3: Regional Map of Johannesburg

(36)

21

The city is the provincial capital of Gauteng, which is considered the wealthiest province and the industrial and commercial center of South Africa. More particularly, Gauteng is the source of 33% of South Africa’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and 50% of all employee remuneration in the country (Gauteng Provincial government, 2005).

According to De Wet et al. (2008), the population in the Gauteng Province is predicted to reach 14 million citizens by this year, putting it in the top 15 urban regions in the world by population. Rapid urbanization leads to spatial and economic disparities which weaken the peoples’ capacity to take part in the urban economy and therefore on their ability to access food. Beall et al (2011) state that, the major challenges emanate from the segregated ideas that the apartheid regime rose, urban poverty and the inability to provide adequate services to the rising population.

Greenberg (2006) confirms that inequalities between the rich and poor are reflected in widespread food insecurity throughout Johannesburg. Half of Johannesburg’s households had income below the national minimum of R1, 60012 per month (Human Development Strategy, 2009). The 2008 Johannesburg Poverty and Livelihoods Study underlined that “the urban poor, residing in certain pockets of the city such as informal settlements and inner city areas, are particularly vulnerable and struggle to gain access to services and opportunities to improve their livelihoods”, De Wet et al. (2008:4).

3.3 Township’s profile: Soweto

Soweto is in the southwest of the greater metropolitan area of Johannesburg and its name stands for South-Western Townships. The reason that this region is selected for the study is because many neighborhoods have a long history in poverty.

More particularly, during the apartheid era, the region became home to black Africans who were expelled from the city’s freehold areas. Till today, most of the dwellers in Soweto live in “matchboxes” houses which were built during the apartheid period in order to provide cheap accommodation. Many residents live in informal settlements where poverty, food insecurity and unemployment are critical problems. According to the City of Johannesburg (2004), regions on the periphery of the city have high

12

(37)

22

rates of vulnerable populations which do not have access to basic services. However, as Klaaste (2004:123 cited in Freire-Medeiros, 2013) describes, Soweto is also a “metaphor for black life in South Africa” meaning that the region appeals tourist who are interested to learn more about the culture of those who struggled for the rise of the “rainbow nation”13.

The main criterion for the areas that were selected is that there is accessibility to land. Probably, there are other criteria which can comply like high unemployment rates, vulnerability, food insecurity but an overall image which indicates or disapproves these conditions, comes up from the data analysis (chapter 5, 6, 7). Last but not least, Soweto was selected because of the presence of the experienced research team of the Izindaba Zokudla project and because the region is considered potentially supportive for urban agriculture.

Gardens from all of the areas you see on the map (Figure 4) were visited besides Senadane, Molapo, Zondi, Pimville, Klipriviersood, Orlando East and Naturena. Most of the gardens were located in the southwest part of the region. For confidential reasons the location is not shared next to the respondent list (see Appendix 2.1).

Figure 4: Regional Map of Soweto

Source: https://prezi.com/zztqzlwb_wl8/untitled-prezi/

13

Rainbow nation is a term invented by Archbishop Desmond Tutu (a South African social rights activist), to describe post-apartheid South Africa, after the first fully democratic election in 1994.

(38)

23 3.4 Food price crisis and food insecurity

During 1972-74 the world experienced severe food crisis due to the rising oil prices and market instability. The latter was linked particularly to the U.S grain production, which was the main exported and influenced global food prices and subsequently international food security (Headey and Fan, 2010: 82).

This led to the establishment of several organizations which had as their mandate to enhance global food security through their actions. The global food prices have decreased and the global food system seemed to be in a steady course. Many African countries were depended on food imports as that seemed sustainable, thus there was no urgent need for governments to promote agriculture (Headey and Fan, 2010:92). However, this changed in 2008 when related factors, (increased oil prices, decline of the U.S dollar, volatility in demands of commodities) resulted in a second global food crisis (Headey and Fan, 2010:88). The roots of this crisis along with other causes such as rapid urbanization and weather shocks are further discussed below. Subsequently, the attention is concentrated on the consequences that the crisis had on underprivileged populations, including South Africans.

3.4.1 Reasons that led to food price increase

One of the major issues that brought the food price crisis in 2008 is associated with the rapid urbanization in the developing world (Satterthwaite et al., 2010). The global population is estimated to reach 9.1 billion between 2009 and 2050 with nearly all the growth taking place in urban areas in low- and middle-income countries (UNDESA, 2010). Ravallion et al. (2007) claim that poverty prevails in urban areas, about one-quarter of the poor in the global South live there and they move to cities more rapidly than the population as a whole.

Given that “the cities of the developing world are spectacularly ill-prepared for the explosion in urban living” (Ginkel in Nature, 2008), growing populations had to adjust to such changes. For instance, China and India, countries with emerging economies and fast population growth improved their purchasing power and thus increased their demand for some specific foods such as livestock products which require large portions of feed grains (Charlebois et al., 2010).

Transportation and energy demand were other main causes of food price hikes as agriculture is greatly depended on fuel and transports. High demand on crude oil led to higher prices and consequently to costly transportations for commodities. The increase of price of crude oil did not only influence the cost

(39)

24

of shipping food supplies but the access to fertilizers, pesticides and agricultural equipment as well (Charlebois et al., 2010). Additionally, this raised demand for alternative fuels such as biofuels, which can serve as a substitute but are made from plants and other agricultural products (such as maize and rapeseed oil). This does not function as an efficient solution given that the price of these crops rises resulting to increasing food prices.

During the crisis in 2008, the depreciation of the U.S. dollar affected the food prices as it is the primary trade currency and its value decreased against euro, pound and Japanese yen. Subsequently the price of food for countries using these currencies was lower meaning that they were buying more. On the contrary, those in the developing world were adversely affected for two reasons, first the dollar depreciated much less against their currencies and secondly, the availability of affordable food was little due to the high demand and import capacity of privileged countries (Headey and Fan 2010; Mitchell, 2008).

Furthermore, during that year the global food production was affected by weather shocks. Australia (which is one of the world’s higher wheat producers), Romania, Lesotho, Somalia, Ghana were hit by draughts while Ecuador, Bolivia, Sri Lanka by floods (Charlebois et al., 2010:4). The world prices on cereals increased particularly by the loss of crop production in Australia, U.S., EU, Canada and Russia (OECD-FAO, 2007).

Soaring food prices triggered global distress and those living in developing nations particularly, went through enormous hardships. The following section delves into that matter.

3.4.2 Impact of high food prices on the developing world

People residing in poor countries are the ones affected the most since they spend almost three-quarters of their income on purchasing staple foods (Cranfield et al., 2007). Headey et al. (2010) state that African countries had to make efforts to meet the demands on cereals which are considerably incorporated in their diet, although consumers were facing difficulty in finding the money for purchasing them. The food that those living in extreme poverty (having up to $1.25 per day) could obtain given the dramatic rise on prices, left large populations with significantly lower food intake.

In general, countries in West Africa, the Horn of Africa (Somalia, Ethiopia, northeastern Kenya and Djibouti), and other states affected by conflicts, droughts, floods or cyclones were more exposed to the risks of higher global food prices as their local food supplies decreased, deteriorating the food