A system analysis of the impact of
feeder road development on newly
defined indicators of agricultural
development, in the Tigray area in
Ethiopia
Providing a benchmark for a more inclusive approach on designating the
impact of feeder roads on agricultural development
Eliane Bakker, Lieke Brackel, Frankie Pols & Quirien Reytenbagh
Interdisciplinairy Project, Future Planet Studies, 18-12-2015
ABSTRACT – The Tigray highlands are known for their high poverty rates. For most of the population agriculture is still the major income source, but yields are not providing food security in the area. As a result Ethiopian governments try to carry out development strategies to improve agriculture and infrastructure, because it is assumed that more roads lead to more development. Previous research highlighted that many factors are either neglected or ignored by only looking at cost-benefit analysis, which is usually done, and it is therefore necessary to estimate a broader view on road development strategies. In this research the impact of feeder road development on agricultural development has been studied in the Tigray area. This is established by estimating important indicators of agricultural development by using a redefinition of ‘agricultural development’. Through system analysis, Causal Loop Diagram (CLD) and dominant loops the impact of road development on food security is analyzed represented by a new variable added to the system: food_in_households. As a result, a benchmark is provided for a more inclusive approach on designating the impact of feeder roads on agricultural development.
Course: Interdisciplinairy Proces
Students: Eliane Bakker (Ecology, 10675744)
Lieke Brackel (Political Science, 10562397) Frankie Pols (Anthropology, 10607552 Quirien Reijtenbagh (Economy, 10549471) Supervisor: Crelis Rammelt
Tutor: Koen van der Gaast Date: 18/12/2015
Content
1 Introduction
4
2 Theoretical framework and methodology
5
2.1 Research subject
5
2.1.1 Method overall research approach
6
2.2 Redefining agricultural development
6
2.2.1 Method of redefinition
6
2.2.2 Interdisciplinary process
7
2.3 Analyzing the agricultural system in Tigray
8
2.3.1 Method: the causal loop diagram
8
2.3.2 Interdisciplinary process
9
2.4 Synthesis: the link between redefinition and system analysis
9
3 Results
11
3.1 Redefinition of agricultural development
11
3.2 System with additions
13
3.2.1 Food in households
13
3.2.2 Sustainable measures
14
3.2.3 Social capital
17
3.2.4 Labour wages
19
3.2.5 Policy circles
20
3.3 Assumptions: implementation and distribution
22
4 Synthesis
23
4.1 Pathways
23
4.2 Scenarios
23
4.2.1 Ecological pathway to food security
24
4.2.2 Social pathway to food security
25
5 Discussion
27
6. Conclusion
28
Literature
30
Appendix A: Causal Loop Diagram
32
Appendix B: Risks and Export
33
1 Introduction
Poverty in the Tigray region in Ethiopia is severe. The growth of cereal crops is the major source of income, but the yield is not covering the domestic demand. In the years 2001-2003 12% of the cereal consumption was imported while almost half of the people were suffering malnutrition (FAO, 2007).
Every 5 years the Ethiopian government presents a Five Years Growth &
Transformation Plan (GTP). The most recent one presents objectives for 2010 till 2015. As agriculture is expected to be the leading source of economic growth, one of the goals is intensifying agricultural production. Also, one of the goals is to improve infrastructure. Poor road accessibility is commonly assumed to be a major driver of both poverty (Gannon & Liu, 1997) and low agricultural production (Pender, 2008).
It is often assumed that more roads lead to more development, but data on the actual impact of roads are rare (DeGrassi, 2005). A purely economic cost-benefit analysis is the most common tool in deciding whether and where to build roads (DeGrassi, 2005). Although social benefits and costs are also recognised, they are sparsely integrated in policies (World Bank, 1999; TRL Transport Research, 2004).
In this research we want to achieve a broader view of the impact of roads on agriculture and the agricultural community in the Tigray highlands. In order to do so, it is necessary to develop a common definition of ‘agricultural development’. This includes defining ‘development’, which can be explained in many different ways. We will include economical, political, anthropological and ecological explanations of the term ‘development’ in Tigray - and assumptions underlying them - and try to integrate them into one definition. This research will present an integrated view on agricultural development, other key concepts, indicators and variables that go with it. To assess agricultural development it is necessary to analyze the agricultural system at present in the Tigray region. This is done by means of a causal loop diagram, derived from Rammelt & Leung (submitted to journal), and adjusted with variables derived from the redefinition of agricultural development. We
conclude this research with a synthesis of the adjusted model with the redefinition of
agricultural development. This will provide us with scenarios of possible influences of roads on the agricultural development and therefore give us insights on the topic of what road development will effectuate in the Tigray region.
2 Theoretical framework and methodology
Due to the interdisciplinary character of our research we came across many assumptions and differing insights between disciplines, which caused us to rethink the question of how to measure the impact of feeder roads on agricultural development. First, we will elaborate on the choices made in restricting our research area. Secondly, we will discuss the methods and choices used in the three parts of this research: the redefinition of agricultural development, the investigation of the local agricultural system and subsequently the synthesis. Finally, the iterative process that shaped our research is integrated into this section to explain certain choices in the process.
2.1 Research subject
This report specifies on agricultural development since the Ethiopian government relies on ADLI: Agricultural Development Led Industrialization, since 1993. Labour intensive and non-mechanised agriculture should be implemented alongside technologies such as irrigation, fertiliser and improved seeds, which improve yields but do not replace labour (Lavers, 2012; MoFed). It relies on agriculture as the main sector to lead Ethiopia towards modernization, industrialization and overall ‘development’.
Next to that, chronic food insecurity still remains a very real threat for millions of Ethiopians alongside the threat of recurring food crises and famines (Devereux et al. 2006: 1). Since 1984, massive amounts of food aid have been sent to Ethiopia to relieve the people in times of famine and many lives were rescued. But at the same time researchers find that the food security in Ethiopia has been deteriorating (Bishop and Hilhorst, 2010: 182). Food production is less than in 1984, nearly half of the population is undernourished and only 24% of the households have sufficient food resources all year round (ibid). Others experience a food gap, several months of food insecurity and consequently many health and societal problems.
A local perspective is most suitable since feeder roads are developed in remote areas in Ethiopia’s periphery and above all, the local approach suits the definition of agricultural development we created best since it emphasizes the community and people that are affected by the roads, as will be explained further on.
Besides, Rammelt and Leung (submitted to journal) already conducted research in this area concerning the influence of roads on development. Hence, the opportunity to build on their data and findings, a rich amount of very context-specific information, made this research possible. The aim was to build on their findings and add to their system. Rammelt and Leung primarily investigated the economic development of this region (i.e. GDP, physical economic assets) and the distributional questions (i.e. fairness, equity). They also address environmental effects and their system shows that the supposedly beneficial effects of road
development are more complex than often presupposed. But in their research, some domination of economic valuation of development still prevail - even though they included more factors than earlier scientists. Furthermore, questions are raised in their discussion concerning the food security of the region and the overall development for the people concerning wages and inequality, which might be addressed by the extended version of the model presented in this paper.
2.1.1 Method overall research approach
In order to do an interdisciplinary research we tried to find the common ground in the four disciplines used in this report: anthropology, ecology, economics and political science. The first step in our research was answering the first sub question from each discipline: “What is agricultural development?”. Each member of our research group carried out disciplinary literature research on the subject of agricultural development. These four different
perspectives - from the disciplines political science, anthropology, economics and ecology - will be integrated with the use of theory redefinition (Repko 2012) to bring out a common meaning of agricultural development. The next step in our research was a system analysis of the agricultural system in Tigray, combined with the development of infrastructure. The last step was to integrate this system with the redefined concept of agricultural development. However, those methods are the result of many steps in the interdisciplinary process that was needed to formulate the final research question.
2.2 Redefining agricultural development
Our aim was to develop a new concept of agricultural development to encompass those local, communal and environmental variables as well. Initially, redefinition of agricultural development is conducted out of the shortcoming of policy makers facing cost-benefit-analysis (CBA) as a main guideline on decision-making on development strategies.
With ‘agricultural’ is meant: the local community, the labourers, the producers, the land, the environment and the local economy.
Agricultural development is a contested concept since the term development implies a notion of improvement. Normative assumptions lie behind many different definitions.
Different disciplines have a divergent view of agricultural development and focus on different strategies to accomplish it. Therefore we first need to clarify what we define as “agricultural development” and find common ground between the disciplines.
2.2.1 Method of redefinition
We chose to use what Repko calls the redefinition method to find common ground (Repko, 2012). First, agricultural development is described from the perspective of each discipline and what assumptions are commonly used in their discipline. Then overlap and possible clashes are identified. Finally we made choices to reject certain assumptions and/or broaden
our definitions of agricultural development. The result will be an integrated interdisciplinary concept “agricultural development” defined from the different disciplines. This redefined concept consists of a broad spectrum of multiple indicators and variables. The concept provides indicators of agricultural development. Important is the notion that these four are not the best our only indicators and that none of them is more important than the other. Many other factors are important as well, but we use them in our research as a summary of our integrated definition of agricultural development.
2.2.2 Interdisciplinary process
During our redefinition process we came across many problems. About the objectivity of science for example: are results neutral, objective and measurable? Or is everything a choice and therefore automatically influenced by the subjectivity of the researchers? Can you redefine concepts as is more common in social sciences and work from a specifically chosen worldview, or does every finding need to be universally applicable? How do you deal with ambiguities in your findings? Contradicting theories of different disciplines?
Is the concept development by itself all western bias or is it possible to say something about the ‘agricultural development’ of a region?
We found common ground in our choice to research from a very contextual and local point of view. Therefore we could be led by actual findings, conducted by earlier researchers, rather than so called ‘world’ theories. Furthermore, from the ecological and anthropological perspective, local research is preferable and political scientists focussing on theories such as institutional economics can be very context-specific as well. Above all, we wanted to measure economic development by other means than GDP, focussing on well-being instead of welfare, i.e. an emphasis on the local communities and people.
We agreed about many concepts that needed to be included into our definition of agricultural development as described above. But the translation towards the second step, investigating the impact on this newly defined agricultural development raised new problems. Only measuring a few variables would be a heavy restriction and in contradiction with our own definition. We could only find common ground in a holistic, local approach that includes almost all factors - also the non-quantifiable factors such as trust, happiness and well-being. To pick two or more variables and only investigate their development would first harm the holistic character of our definition and secondly, only the quantifiable factors could have been included.
What followed was an iterative process where we searched for a research method and in doing so further discussed on our definition of agricultural development. At last, we came across the causal loop diagram. This is a qualitative describing tool, which can enable us to conduct a locally oriented research and include our integrated definition of agricultural development. We wanted to show how our definition would change the system and could
add to it. Therefore the causal loop diagram could show how many factors need to be included while investigating the impact of roads on agricultural development.
2.3 Analyzing the agricultural system in Tigray
Having defined a new concept of agricultural development, a proper tool for assessing the impact of roads on this new concept had to be found. After a process of brainstorming and considering several ideas and techniques, the Causal Loop Diagram (CLD) of Crelis & Leung (submitted to journal) appeared to be the most applicable tool. The CLD is a qualitative system analysis, which reflects on variables and their - either positive or negative - causal interrelationship (Forrester, 1968; Meadows et al., 1972; Meadows & Wright, 2008 via Crelis & Leung, submitted to journal). This specific model depicts an overview of the agricultural system in Tigray and the influence that roads have on the system. In the CLD we could identify our indicators and in this way the system (including the influence of roads) could be linked to agricultural development. At the same time, by doing this, agricultural development was integrated into the model. In our vision the model was not complete yet, which is why several processes were added.
The causal loop diagram was analyzed in the perspective of the four disciplines. In the first inventory we came across more factors that influence the agricultural system than depicted in the causal loop diagram. For this reason variables and preconditions of
agricultural development are used to adjust the causal loop diagram, making it more complete.
2.3.1 Method: the causal loop diagram
To make a CLD of the Tigray agricultural system we used the model in figure 2as a starting point (Rammelt & Leung, submitted to journal). This model is part of a larger study on the (in)direct effects of rural roads on productivity and employment in Tigray. In this study the CLD was used to assemble the subjective perceptions of rural road impacts from a diversity of respondents into a systematized view of the whole community.
Since the economy in Tigray is mainly based on agricultural, farming is the dominant activity for 88% of the households; the model focusses on the agricultural system in the region. To make the system usable for our integrated definition of agricultural development we decided to make some changes and additions to the system. These changes are based on a disciplinary assessment of the model from each individual discipline and then integrated into one interdisciplinary model. Next to some additions of edges and nodes, we also used some new symbols and layers in the model. All the entities used, old and new, are presented in Appendix A.
Figure 2: the original model from Crammelt & Leung
2.3.2 Interdisciplinary process
In adjusting the original version of the model, the definition of agricultural development provided the possible influences that could be included. At the same time, this definition was reshaped since something needs to be very clear and thought-through before it can be rightly implemented in a causal-loop diagram. This helped us redefine and specify our earlier
findings. In this process we found the link between the redefinition and the diagram: food security.
2.4 Synthesis: the link between redefinition and system analysis
The definition of agricultural development helped retrieving new influences and nodes for the causal loop diagram. But the initial aim of this research was to create a system that could assess the ‘agricultural development’ in the Tigray region.
During the redefinition phase of the research, it was estimated that well-being for all can be said to be the ultimate goal of agricultural development. An example hereof is the agricultural led development strategy the Ethiopian government upholds. Agricultural development is supposed to increase the development of Ethiopia and the well-being of her citizens over all.
One important (but most certainly not exclusive) part of well-being is food security. There are many definitions for food security but Devereux et al (2006) used these indicators of food insecurity: self-reported food shortage over the past year, meals eaten per day during the worst month within the past year, coping strategies adopted in response to food
insecurity, household self-assessed well-being. Gilligan et al. (2008) measure food security in the food gap: the number of months that a household reports to have trouble satisfying its food needs.
According to Maslow’s pyramid and many other sources, decreasing the food gap is one of the first development goals to be reached. Since food security will enable people to concentrate on other things such as creating businesses or education e.a.
Subsequently, almost all international and national policy focuses on decreasing the dependency on food aid, occurrence of famines and decrease the food gap (the amount of months of the year a household is food insecure).
In this specific case in Tigray, food security is not met and therefore we chose to assess well-being by the level of food security. Food security can be measured in many ways, since this is a contested concept by itself. But we chose to simplify it to
food_in_households. Of course this does not address the very real worries about the diversity and quality of food, but as a starter it can say something about the food gap and therefore can be seen as an indicator for food security. Food_in_households is the amount of food (kg) present in a household over a year.
To measure the influence of roads on agricultural development, we have looked into the new adjusted causal loop diagram and followed the influence accesability_mobility through the system with food_in_households as endstation. This with the question in mind “will the roads increase or decrease the amount of food in households in this system?”
3 Results
3.1 Redefinition of agricultural development
In this study development is regarded as a succession of events that leads to positive effect of people’s well-being. The goal of well-being through agricultural development is stemming from this assumption.
As the result of redefinition of agricultural development many possible indicators were found, of which the four most important were distillated. These indicators can be viewed as the foundation of our definition of agricultural development. They contain many subjects that need to be taken into account, and can in a certain way be viewed as pre-conditions for agricultural development. First the different perspectives on agricultural development originating from our disciplines are discussed, secondly these four indicators are discussed and at last an overall conclusion on the definition of agricultural development is given.
Regularly, economists use cost-benefit analysis to regard an investment in
development strategies as valuable. In CBA “agricultural development” is simply defined as “net benefits to farmers caused by the impact induced by the project or policy” (Atkinson, 2006). Net benefits are just all effects that attribute to the farmers agricultural output in terms of reduced costs of production or increased value of production, eventually leading to a higher agricultural output and an increased contribution to the farmer’s income and ultimately national income.
Many political theorists drive on these economic assumptions and see agricultural development as the simplification of increased productivity and higher yields (Conway 1988; Bates en Block 2013). At the same time, Gerschenkron (1962) stresses the possible risks of low-development countries abruptly entering the world economy. Following on his insights, others too propose different development strategies where other values than higher
productivity are presented (Xinshen, Hazell & Thurlow, 2010; Acharya, 1981). According to Diao, Hazell and Thurlow (2010), Ethiopia must not only accelerate its growth but also enhance its “pro-poorness” by choosing the composition of growth that is most effective at reducing poverty and increases food security for all.
The role of social and institutional factors should also be included since they shape the impact and the potential benefits and costs of agricultural development (Degrassi 2005). He points out several ways in which the rural people do not benefit from higher agricultural productivity sustainability and equity of a policy. Institutional and social factors influence the sustainability and equity of a policy, but emphasis has to be put on state-intervention and regulation in order to make agricultural development - seen as agricultural modernization, successful. Beneath that lies the assumption that the state is strong enough and does not fail.
Anthropologists stress the urge to view development as a process of getting from point A to B for a society, where changes in inequality, cohesion and rationalization are the
conditions on which development will be reviewed. When development in agriculture takes place, the emphasis will be on the development taking place on the people living in this culture, agriculturalists (Eriksen, 2010). These are people in rural communities around the agrarian production. These are not only the farmers, but also the rest of the people that live in and around the community, so it also important to encounter culture specific aspects of local community.
Ecologists define agriculture as the growing of useful plants and raising of livestock for human need (Abellanosa & Pava, 1987). More weight is put on the way agricultural practises affect different aspects of nature, for example soil, water regulation and
biodiversity. In agricultural development strategies, focus is on the sustainability of these agricultural practices. For agriculturalists as described above, it is of vital importance that agriculture can be practiced in the future as well, to maintain their livelihood.
Integrating these insights into definition of agricultural development have lead to several indicators that have to be taken into account in reviewing agricultural development. These indicators are seen in figure 3.
Figure 3: the four indicators of agricultural development
The focus on well-being instead of welfare underlies the four indicators - and thus agricultural development -. In that sense increased agricultural output will not mean increased
agricultural development if it does not enhance wellbeing. Therefore our indicators together indicate agricultural development and are attributive to wellbeing. Note that they are context specific with the goal of enhanced well-being in the region, and in which agricultural
development in the Tigray region is food security, represented by food_in_households in the model.
In conclusion, agricultural development is the enhancement of well-being of agriculturalists through the growing of useful plants and raising livestock, resulting in higher incomes, agricultural output and food security, without harming the ecosystem that provides the resources for agriculture.
3.2 System with additions
In this section we will discuss the changes we made in the original model: the additions of sustainable_measures, food_in_houshold, social capital and the policy layer. The changes are indicated with colors in the figures. The original model is in black, the additions and changes are in red.
Figure 4: the extended system of the Tigray agricultural system
3.2.1 Food in households
We chose to extend Rammelt’s local oriented model with the new variable
food_in_households. In our opinion the best way to add a quantitative measure of food availability in local households, which in a certain way represents local food security in the Tigray region. Increased food_on_farms can potentially increase food_in_households, directly through the increased food availability to local farmers. But also indirectly, because more food can be transported and sold on local markets available for locals to buy.
So more food_on_markets increases food_sold, but food_prices also affects
loops. For example, the reduction of food prices is induced by the (long term) effect of more and more food being transported and sold on markets (R in Figure 5). But the balancing feedback loop (B) is likely to occur at some point. Because a growing stock of
food_on_markets reduces food_prices, revenue and profits, and therefore slows down food_production and food_transportation. This reduces the growth of the stock of food_on_markets and has a suppressing effect on food_prices.
This can be due to road development and irrigation expansion that resulted in people and farmers becoming more engaged in growing similar types of crops. Furthermore,
food_prices are also affected by seasonal fluctuations, environmental changes in soil and water resources, government subsidies, and so on (Rammelt, submitted to journal). These are not included in the model.
Figure 5: the addition of food in households
3.2.2 Sustainable measures
In the diagram a relatively simple loop of input, output and ecological depletion is depicted. Input_adoption refers to the adoption of fertilizer, irrigation in dry season and use of improved seeds. These inputs lead to increased food_production, which lead to more possibilities for input adoption.
However, irrigation during dry season can lead to water shortages, and overuse of fertilizer leads to degradation of soils. Also, deforestation and soil erosion as a result of converting soil for agricultural purposes is part of the problem. Together this is summarized as ecological_depletion. The reinforcing feedback loop of food production and input adoption will maintain up until a certain point, when resources become limiting (Rammelt, 2005).
Thus, ecological depletion occurs when resources become limiting and food production remains increasing. The consequences include water shortage, degraded soil (erosion,
runoff (Howarth, 2000), depletion of SOM, nutrient leaching (Ge et al., 2010)), and water and soil pollution (heavy metals, antibiotics and hormones (Aber, 1997)).
In the causal loop diagram both positive and negative developments are drawn. It is clear that ecological depletion is a negative development in the ecological sense. Indirectly it also has a negative impact in a social and economic sense, because it will hinder food production in the long run. The diagram lacks a feedback that counteracts ecological depletion.
The Ethiopian government has presented intensification of agriculture as a goal in its most recent Five Years Growth & Transformation Plan (GTP) of 2010 - 2015. The government is aware that intensification of agriculture must happen in a sustainable way. Sustainable agricultural development can be defined as the growing of plants and raising of livestock in a way that it can provide people now and in future generations, among different socioeconomic groups of an equal opportunity of well-being. In order to do so, ecological resources must maintain a healthy system that provides the resources needed for agriculture. Thus a new causal link between sustainable_measures and ecological_depletion can be constructed (figure 6). It would also be possible to link sustainable_measures with input_adoptions because the goal of the measures is to reform input adoptions into sustainable input adoptions, but the former link makes clear that the goal of the measures is to diminish negative ecological impacts. The section Sustainable Measures will review several measures against ecological depletion.
Furthermore, a direct link between land_managed and ecological_depletion is missing. Extension and intensification of agriculture often leads to land degradation; erosion is increased as well as nutrient and chemical leaching to groundwater and streams (Foley et al., 2005). More land_managed (or more intensively managed) leads to more
ecological_depletion. For this reason a positive causal link is added between those nodes.
Possible measures in Tigray
Some measures are primarily introduced for fertilizer and pesticide reduction, although some have multiple benefits. Below I have summarized measures that are often already widely accepted as ecological beneficiary.
• Perennials are crops that live longer than two years (as opposed to annuals such as
corn and soy that live one year) and that retain nitrogen in their root system, preventing nitrogen leaching. Furthermore perennials outcompete the extensive root systems protect the soil against erosion (Howarth, 2005).
• Winter crops greatly reduce nutrient leaching in winter and spring, when arable land
lie fallow (ibid).
• In precision agriculture fertilizers and pesticides are only applied where and when
needed. Excess application is minimized resulting in reduction of nutrient loss (leaching) and insect damage (Bongiovanni & Lowenberg-DeBoer, 2004).
• Mulching of crop residues is the recycling of crop residues with the aim of reducing
export of nutrients, adding organic carbon to the soil, increasing water infiltration and reducing soil erosion (Hengsdijk et al., 2005).
Other measures are aiming primarily at soil and water conservation.
• Stone or soil bunds are elevations alongside small acres uphill or downhill of a slope.
This result in the formation of terraces. The terraces slow down the water flow downhill of a slope, which gives water the time to infiltrate in the soil making water available for crops. This is a widespread measure in Tigray for water conservation (Hengsdijk et al., 2005; Howarth, 2005)).
• Reforestation is seen as a tool in rehabilitating degraded soil. The tree cover protects
the soil against runoff, crust formation and erosion from rainfall. Tree roots provide cohesion and water retention of the soil. Additionally the forest provides fuel and construction material (Hengsdijk et al., 2005).
• Agroforestry is a strategy in which trees and crops are combined in order to maintain
fertility and prevent soil erosion (Young, 1989; Nair, 1993; Dommergues, 1987).
• Conservation tillage is practised as a means of protecting soils from compaction,
erosion and retaining water in soils through improving soil structure and stability. Consequently the soil is less exposed to runoff and contamination of water surfaces with nutrients, pesticides and sediment. Furthermore, soil biota that recycle nutrients are able to develop more easily under conservation tillage (Holland, 2004).
Some of these measures are already in use, but the adoption of all these measures can only be catalyzed by proper policy. May be mobility_and_accessibility is a means by which policies can be carried through, stimulating the integration of sustainable agriculture practices. Roads might stimulate the adoption of sustainable measures by providing transport of necessary materials and knowledge, but research on this is lacking.
3.2.3 Social capital
Social scientists have stressed the importance of the development of social capital as a pre-condition for development (Bates, 1981). Social capital is a typical example of a contested concept. It was introduced in order to encompass the influence of social relations on economic development. Since the existence of the word “social capital”, many different definitions have been introduced, which complicates its essence. Lyon (2000) stated that social capital is an umbrella term that covers a range of processes by which social relation, institutions are formed (Lyon 2000). But we regard the definition of Kawachi and Berkman (2000) as most comprehensive and is therefore used in our research. In their research social capital is defined as “ the presence of strong social bonds measured by levels of trust and norms of reciprocity, the abundance of associations that bridge social divisions and the presence of institutions of conflict management”.
We implemented social_capital together with financial_capital in an overarching node. The financial node was already in the model under the name capital. We added financial and social (see figure 7). In that sense financial capital is now regarded as financial assets - i.e. agricultural equipment - and social capital as the definition of Kawachi and Berkman (2000).
Figure 7: the addition of social capital
We chose to use social capital since it concerns the collective, instead of concerning the individual, like human capital and financial capital do (ibid). However, social capital influences human capital by increasing the wellbeing, education and health of the people. But it also includes concepts that operate on community level such as the level of trust
between people. Since our research focus is the local community of Tigray and the original system provided by Rammelt and Leun focusses on the community level as well, social capital seems better suited.
Social capital is something you can invest in and will produce desirable returns through increased benefit flows. A community with high social capital is more productive and more resilient, extra important in Tigray with the risks of environmental stress and the food gap (ibid). Therefor social_capital, like financial capital, has a positive causal linkage with food production. Also, investment has a positive causal linkage with both social and financial capital.
Lyon (2000) even argues that social capital is a self-reconstituting process: the more it is used, the greater it becomes. Social capital is a concept that cannot be quantified but can be integrated into our qualitative system approach - to show that not only hard
investments matter but also the ideas and values of the community are very important. We showed this with a reinforcing edge.
Furthermore, social capital is said to increase resilience and stabilize or even increase the income of the households which raises their well-being (ibid). Especially in contexts where actors cannot rely on formal institutions, which is the case in Ethiopia with its weak state, is social capital very important. It helps people initiate micro enterprises and sustain their business activities (ibid). Besides, Rose (2000) demonstrates that social capital also contributes to a healthy community, it improves the health of individuals as well as the public health in general.
At last, social capital is said to be a public good and therefore should be promoted by the government. With appropriate catalyzation, in our model the policy circles, social capital can become a factor of societal production that helps people to meet their needs and aspirations better, with whatever other resources available (Uphoff and Wijayaratna, 2000). Under the assumption that policy is rightly developed and executed.
Social capital enhances cooperation and trust in a community. Consequently, a high level of social capital increases the accessibility to credit in a community (Lyon, 2000). We excluded credit from the model since it would overcomplicate it due to its ambiguous influences. However, a positive influence of credit is that people can obtain means of production that will enhance food production the the region.
Another example is the resilience of the community that is increased by a high level of social capital. Environmental stress, months of food insecurity or unpredictable events will cause less harm in communities with high social capital and therefore social capital slows down the negative influence of these events on food production. Again, those events are not all included into the model, but the notion of social capital is nevertheless included to show that this concept does have an influence on the overall system.
3.2.4 Labour wages
Agricultural development could only be attributive if most benefits are entitled to local population and thereby enhance food security. The FSP programs are already helping making local population less vulnerable to high food prices in times of environmental distress that affects harvest and making locals more food secure by let them join food-for-work programs. This is the reason we added the new component of “income paid out in food” to labour_wages, pictured as an apple. If households are paid out in food this has an direct increasing effect on food_in_households. Nevertheless, income paid out in money terms may also have an increasing effect of food_in_households, because more household income provides the opportunity to households to spend their additional income on food. Because the main problem in the Tigray region is predominantly insufficient food accessible to local population, local population is very often food insecure. Therefore we decided that we can assume that most additional income earned is indeed spend on food and lead to more food_in_households.
3.2.5 Policy circles
International and national policy is designed to reduce the food gap in Ethiopia and to increase agricultural production in line with their agricultural-led-development strategy and subsequently well-being (MoFed 2011; AGRA 2015). These policies are translated in programs that provide food aid, education, materials, credit and more.
We chose to include the policy into our system analysis but we should make it very clear that the policy is not part of the system itself. The system functions with or without the policy and the influence of policy should be seen as a layer. We name it a layer since it only works as a catalysator/brake on existing causal relations in the model. It aims to enhance causal loops that benefit agricultural production and decrease the influence of possible negative
factors/risks. Under the assumption that the policy is well designed and implemented and increases well-being of the whole community (equal distribution). It could be said that such a policy has and will never exist. However, policy can be pivotal to which causal loop will become dominant. This is important since many causal loops are ambiguous and whether the influence has a positive or negative effect on agricultural development is time and context dependent.
Figure 9: the policy layer
The blue circles around the nodes represent the influence of the FSP. The FSP is in line with our holistic and inclusive approach to agricultural development since if focusses on hard mechanistic measures as well as on more ‘soft’ solutions. It addresses the ecological and more technical aspects of agricultural production as well as the social factors such as the food gap and the social safety net. Political scientists have stressed the importance of safety
nets provided by the government as a pre-condition for overall development (Tweeten, 2007; Bates, 1981).
The FSP (food security program) is the overarching name for many policies initiated in 2005 by the Ethiopian Government in order to reach their development goals. Part of the FSP are the PSNP, the OFSP and the voluntary resettlement program (Bishop and Hilhorst 2010: 189). This is the umbrella policy combining national as well as international aid.
The PSNP (productive safety net program) is the the largest safety net program in Sub-Saharan Africa with an annual budget of 500 million US dollars and over 7 million beneficiaries (Gillian et al. 2008). The PSNP is funded by the World Bank and its main goal is to break the cycle of dependence on food aid in Ethiopia by increasing
household/community resilience. First households will be targeted in different income classes which will dictate if they can become beneficiaries of the project (participants need to be able to ‘graduate’ within 3 years) and if so, which kind of help they will receive. The PSNP
provides direct support in the form of cash/food transfers and public work projects where beneficiaries receive food/cash for work, the so-called food-for-work programs.
The OFSP (other food security programs) complements the PSNP by providing communities and households with productivity enhancing services such as: access to credit, agricultural extension services, technology transfers (advise/education), irrigation and the soil water and conservation program. It’s aim is to encourage agricultural productivity and
thereby income from agriculture. In 2006, 32,7 % of the households in the public work program received OFSP as well (Gillian et al. 2008: 1685).
When a blue circle is depicted around a node, policy is said to catalyse that particular influence. So if it increases, policy will accelerate the increase and if it decreases, policy intends to slow down the movement.
An example of the influence of policy can be seen around the node input_adoption. Road development increases the presence of development agents that promote new agricultural techniques. Those agents are part of the OFSP and aim to increase input adoption in order to increase food production (MoFed, 2013). At the same time, policy in the OFSP such as the soil and water conservation program promotes sustainable_measures, which reduces the deteriorating effects of increased input adoption (ibid).
Nevertheless, one important discussion point should be addressed. Policies are proposed as the solution to many problems in Ethiopia, but at the same time they can fail in many ways. First, the policy can be bad-designed caused by wrong assumptions, limited knowledge or even indifference towards the societal consequences. Second, the policy can be wrongly implemented due to numerous reasons such as corruption, simple mistakes, miscommunication, too little communication or education e.a. The policy as catalyst is highly utopic, because in most of the cases, especially in weak states, policies often do not work
out as they were designed. Bishop and Hilhorst (2010) show that very well with the faults that are made in targeting the beneficiaries for the PSNP program in Ethiopia, which undermines the goals of the policy, increases inequality and decreases food security for the poorest. They stress that policy is the result of interaction between stakeholders, who try to make policy fit into their perspectives of the problem and goals. These perspectives are mostly formed by their cultural and institutional environment.
3.3 Assumptions: implementation and distribution
An important note to take into account when using this model is that we used two
assumptions in the model. These two assumptions outline both an ideal situation rather than the actual situation in Tigray, but are necessary to be made to make sure that the model is not too complex and usable for our analysis and otherwise there would be barriers for the working of the entire model.
Our first assumption is one of distribution: every inhabitant can be a part of the system. In reality this does not need to be the case. The effects of all nodes are distributed equally in the community, and exclusion is not possible. In reality, an individual can get excluded from the labour system even when there is more agricultural production. This inequality is difficult to implement in the system, because unequal distribution could mean exclusion from the system for an individual person.
The second assumption is about implementation. Sustainable_measures, for example, could mean less ecological_depletion, but only if they are implemented in the right way. This goes for all the policy layer entities. To avoid ambiguous relations - edges that could be positive or negative, depending on how the implementation of policy goes - we chose to assume that policy implementation has no problems. Everything will be implemented as intended in policy.
4 Synthesis
In the answers to the sub questions we have found a more inclusive definition of agricultural development and subsequently added influences to the qualitative systemic analysis of the agricultural processes in Tigray. But how do those two intertwine?
In this part of the report we combine the agricultural system of Tigray with our integrated definition of development. We do this, using dominant pathways in the system as indicators of what possible scenarios for agricultural development can occur when introducing roads. Next to that, the extended model is adjusted according to our holistic definition of agricultural development. In the iterative process of this interdisciplinary project, the adjustments were inspired by our newly found definition and helped create an overview of indicators that should be included into the system.
4.1 Pathways
To look at some scenarios in the system we will start at mobility_and_accessability, so the development of feeder roads. We are looking into the impact these roads have on
agricultural development and thus this is the starting point of our pathways.
As and end of the pathway we have chosen to look at food_in_households. As explained before, agricultural development is to increase the development of the Tigray community overall: well-being. Since food insecurity still remains an important threat in Tigray, we chose to focus on food security as part of well-being, with food_in_households as its indicator. Food can be produced on the farms and sold on the markets, but as long as it does not end up with the households people still do not have enough to eat. To investigate the impact of roads on agricultural development, we therefore look at food_in_households as an end of the pathways.
To measure the influence of roads on agricultural development, we can now look into our causal loop diagram and follow the influence accesability_mobility through the system with food_in_households as end station. Will the roads increase or decrease the amount of food in households in this system?
4.2 Scenarios
In the causal loop diagram multiple feedback loops are depicted. Some competing loops have an ambiguous outcome, depending on which processes are predominating at a certain moment. To demonstrate this, different scenarios are lifted out and discussed. This will also show how shifting dominance can encourage or impede agricultural development.
4.2.1 Ecological pathway to food security
Mobility_and_accessability leads to more input_adoption, wich causes higher
food_production, which in turn leads to more input_adoption. This is due to access if access to roads inreases houses of local governments that distribute fertilizers, become easier accessible and more input adoption will lead to higher food production.
This is a reinforcing feedback loop. However, after a period of time ecological_depletion occurs and this has a counterproductive effect on food_production (and indirect on food_in_households).
By implementing sustainable_measures the effect of ecological_depletion can be minimized, depending on how effective measures are and to what extend the integration is achieved. For example, if the measure of precision agriculture is practiced (see section Possible measures in Tigray), less fertilizer and less water will be spilled. This leads to a decrease in erosion, groundwater contamination and depletion and insect damage. Because input_adoption is only applied when and where needed, food production will ideally remain the same while minimizing ecological damage.
When mobility_and_accessibility and sustainable_measures are dominant, more food in households will be the ultimate result. In this loop we see our indicators of ‘Agricultural Output’ and ‘Continuousness of Agricultural Practices’. An increased food production is more agricultural output and the sustainable measures ensure the continuousness of agricultural practices.
However, this dominance is not necessarily the case. What if implementation does not go well? The sustainable measures are not implemented in the right way or input adoption goes wrong and ecological depletion will happen. Than food in households will be less. Here we see our indicator of ‘Acceptance and Participation’ at work: the people in Tigray can be not able or willing to participate in the policy. For example they do get the seeds, but do not have the resources to irrigate in the proper way. Or they have to conduct sustainable measures they do not understand how to because it interferes with their traditional way of farming. A shift in dominance can then be the cause of food insecurity rather than food security.
Figure 11 ecological pathway resulting less food in households
4.2.2 Social pathway to food security
Mobility_and_accesibility leads to more investment, which leads in turn to increased capital, both social and financial. Investment in social capital can be of different origin than
investment in financial capital. But roads can increase investment in both types of capital and we wanted to stress the importance that social capital is included as a significant production factor. Increased capital, both financial and social, has a positive effect on food_production and therefore will eventually lead to more food_in_households. Capital in general will lead to higher food_production. More financial_capital means assets that can increase this
production. Social_capital can benefit the overall productivity of the community. For example by enhancing cooperation and credit possibilities. As a result, increased food_production leads to a higher labour_demand. When there is more food to be produced, more labour is needed. However, financial_capital often has a negative causal linkage with labour_demand, because financial capital can be used for improving production technologies. This means more food production, but with less labour, because of investment in machinery and other
technological solutions. The government of Ethiopia stimulates the nowadays still labour-intensive agricultural development, which means that labour_demand should increase as a result of more food_production and lead to more food_in_households.
Figure 12 social pathway to food security
In this pathway our indicators of Distribution and Acceptance and participation emerge. Social capital can play an important role in the acceptance and participation of policy in an area. In this way social capital influences big parts of the system and its outcomes. Equal distribution of the benefits roads can provide, depends on the success of the labour-intensive development programs. When these will not succeed, financial capital can cause a decrease in labour demand, which will in turn lead to less food in households.
5 Discussion
Our definition of agricultural development highly influenced the choice of research methods and the results. However, that definition is neither perfect nor complete and even though this approach seemed to us as the best approach, we are well aware that it is very difficult to create a truly holistic definition of agricultural development.
Furthermore, we had to exclude many influences because their influences on the system were highly ambiguous and it was not possible to overcome this ambiguousness by the shifting dominance principle. Those relations need further investigation to make their influence on the local agricultural system clear.
Two of those excluded influences are risks of agricultural led development and of the failed state and the influence of export on our local system. From literature we concluded that their influence is too important to be completely overlooked so those will be discussed in Appendix B.
6 Conclusion
In this research the central goal was to find a more inclusive approach for investigating the impact of feeder roads on agricultural development. We established this by redefining agricultural development and combining this definition with the adjusted agricultural system of Tigray in the CLD.
The redefinition of agricultural development is the enhancement of well-being of
agriculturalists through the growing of useful plants and raising livestock, resulting in higher incomes, agricultural output and food security, without harming the ecosystem that provides the resources for agriculture. This resulted in the four indicators of agricultural output, continuousness of agricultural practices, participation and acceptance and distribution-, which all in individually in a certain way indicate agricultural development, but cannot viewed separately as constituting factors of agricultural development. What the balance of these indicators should be, depends on the overall goal of agricultural development, which is in essence enhancing well-being. Context specific circumstances designate the prominent goal urgently needed to enhance well-being, which in the Tigray region is food security.
This food security we added to the CLD agricultural represented as the additional node food_in_households. Furthermore social capital and sustainable measures, labour wages was adjusted and a layer of policy was introduced. By adding social capital as an addition to financial capital, we stressed the importance of regarding those concepts separately, because both have different impacts within the system, and other indirect
different influences on food security. Food-for-work programs facilitate that labour is not only paid out in money terms, but also in food and therefore we defined the concept labour wages more broadly by including this difference into the node labour_wages with a direct positive causal linkage to food_in households. Sustainable_measures were added to supplement the environmental part of the agricultural system. The layer of policy covers the programs
designed to reduce the food gap in Ethiopia, increase agricultural production in line with their agricultural-led development strategy and subsequently well-being. Notes have been put on under what assumptions; equal distribution and implementation; agricultural development can be sustained.
By elaborating Rammelt’s system model, with new nodes or adjusted nodes that are necessary to include into the model to estimate the inter linkages and dominant loops important for food security, we are now able to see how road development could possibly increase or decrease certain dominant loops created by agricultural development.
It is important to stress that we do not wish to predict which pathways will be dominant in the near future or in the long-term. This is not possible with the scenarios we described.
However, the combination of our indicators with the extended version of the Tigray
agricultural system can show us the different scenarios of the impact of roads on agricultural development. It provides us with possible outcomes of the introduction of feeder roads and insights in the effects on the agricultural development in the Tigray region.
Literature
AGRA (2015). http://archive.agra.org/where-we-work/ethiopia. Retrieved on 10/10/2015. AGP (Agricultural Growth Program) – Ethiopian Government (2015)
http://ethioagp.org/download/AGP-AMDe/PASDEP.pdf retrieved on 10/10/2015
Bates, R. H. (1981). “Markets and States in tropial Africa: the political basis of agricultural policies” California series on social choice and political economy. University of California Press.
Bates, R. H. and Block, S. A. (2013). “Revisiting African Agriculture: Institutional Change and Productivity Growth. The journal of politics, vol. 75. No. 2 pp 372 – 384
Bishop, C., & Hilhorst, D. (2010). From food aid to food security: the case of the Safety Net policy in Ethiopia. The Journal of Modern African Studies, 48(02), 181-202.
Deininger, K., Ali, D. A., & Alemu, T. (2013). Productivity effects of land rental market operation in Ethiopia: evidence from a matched tenant–landlord sample.Applied Economics, 45(25),
3531-3551.
Devereux, S., Sabates-Wheeler, R., Tefera, M., & Taye, H. (2006). Ethiopia’s Productive Safety Net Programme (PSNP). Trends in PSNP transfers within targeted households. Final report. Sussex, UK: Institute of Development Studies and Indak International.
Diao, Xinshen, Peter Hazell, and James Thurlow. (2010) "The role of agriculture in African development." World development 38.10 1375-1383.
Eriksen, T. H. (2010). Small Places. Large Issues: An Introduction to Social and Cultural Anthropology.
FAO (2003). Trade reforms and food security, conceptualization the linkages. ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/005/y4671e/y4671e00.pdf, retrieved on 17/12/2015.
Foley, J. A., DeFries, R., Asner, G. P., Barford, C., Bonan, G., Carpenter, S. R., ... & Helkowski, J. H. (2005). Global consequences of land use. science, 309(5734), 570-574. Gilligan, D. O., Hoddinott, J., & Taffesse, A. S. (2009). The impact of Ethiopia's Productive Safety Net Programme and its linkages. The journal of development studies, 45(10), 1684-1706.
Government of Ethiopia (2004), The Ethiopian Productive Safety Net Program, Addis Ababa, Kawachi, I., & Berkman, L. (2000). Social cohesion, social capital, and health.Social
epidemiology, 174-190.
Lavers, T. (2012) ‘Land grab’ as development strategy? The political economy of agricultural investment in Ethiopia, The Journal of Peasant Studies, 39:1, 105-132, DOI: 10.1080/03066150.2011.652091
commercialisation and the ‘land grab’, The Journal of Peasant Studies, 39:3-4, 795- 822, DOI: 10.1080/03066150.2012.660147
Lavers, T. (2013). Food security and social protection in highland Ethiopia: linking the Productive Safety Net to the land question. The Journal of Modern African Studies, 51(03), 459-485.
Lewis, D. (2005). 29 Anthropology and development: the uneasy relationship. A handbook of economic anthropology, 472.
Li, T. M. (2014). Land’s end: Capitalist relations on an indigenous frontier. Duke University Press.
Lyon, F. (2000). Trust, networks and norms: the creation of social capital in agricultural economies in Ghana. World Development, 28(4), 663-681.
Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (MoARD). 2009. Food security programme, 2010–2014. Addis Ababa: MoARD.
Ministry of Finance and Economic Development (MoFED). 2003. Rural development policy and strategies. Addis Ababa: MoFED.
Narayan, D., & Pritchett, L. (1999). Cents and sociability: Household income and social capital in rural Tanzania. Economic development and cultural change, 47(4), 871-897. OʼDriscoll, E. (2009). Applying the ʻUncomfortable Scienceʼ: the Role of Anthropology in Development. Special Postgraduate Issue, 16(1), 13-21.
Rammelt, C.F., Leung, M., SUBMITTED TO JOURNAL. Tracing the causal loops through local perceptions of rural road impacts in Ethiopia.World Development.
Repko, A. (2012). Interdisciplinary research: Theory and process.
Rose, R. (2000). How much does social capital add to individual health?. Social science & medicine, 51(9), 1421-1435.
Scott, J. C. (1998). Seeing like a state: How certain schemes to improve the human condition have failed. Yale University Press.
Tigray Region Plan and Finance Bureau (2003). Next Five Years (2010/11-2014/15) Regional GTP. http://www.tigraionline.com/growth_transformation_plan_in_tigrai_state.pdf retrieved on 17/12/2015.
Uphoff, N., & Wijayaratna, C. M. (2000). Demonstrated benefits from social capital: the productivity of farmer organizations in Gal Oya, Sri Lanka. World Development, 28(11), 1875-1890.
Woolcock, M.. (1998). Social Capital and Economic Development: Toward a Theoretical Synthesis and Policy Framework. Theory and Society, 27(2), 151–208. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/657866
World Bank (2007) Agriculture for Development: World Development Report (2008), World Bank and Oxford University Press, Washington, DC
Appendix A: Causal Loop Diagram
The working of a the Causal Loop Diagram as explained in Crammelt & Leung:
“CLDs consist of nodes and edges. In a ‘positive’ causal link, the influenced node changes in the same direction as the influencing node. For example, if variable_1 in Figure 1 decreases, variable_2 also decreases. A solid line indicates a positive causal link. A ‘negative’ causal link (dotted line) means the two nodes change in opposite directions. Influences can also be delayed (//) relative to other influences in the system. CLDs can include phenomena by which a process is influenced by its own outcome, i.e., feedback. We refer to balancing feedback (B) when the influence slows down the process and to reinforcing feedback (R) when the influence speeds up the process. As explored in this paper, these mechanisms largely define the dynamics of systems over time.” (Crammelt&Leuning: 5-6)
Figure 1: example of variables connected by causal links and feedback loops
Figure 2: the remaining symbols: the input node, the output node, the division between wages in food and money, the reinforcing edge, the overarching node and the policy layer.
The remaining symbols:
When a node is only an input, so it only influences other nodes and is not influenced by other nodes, the line of the node circle is dotted instead of solid. When a node is only output, so it is influenced by other nodes and does not influences others nodes, the line of the node circle is both dotted and solid. We also implemented an overarching node, which consists of two nodes. This node can influence and be influenced as a whole, but the nodes inside can also have differences in edges that go to and away from them. The sign of the apple and of the Euro means a division of labour wages in food and money. The edge that comes from the same node as it leads to means that this node reinforces itself. The blue layers on some of the nodes mean they are introduced by policy. All these symbols can be seen in figure 2.
Appendix B: Risks and Export
Risks of agricultural led development and failed states
The Ethiopian government uses agricultural led development as earlier described. This means it is switching towards a more export-oriented strategy and aims for trade-based food security instead of self-sufficiency (GTP, AGP, 2015). They place greater emphasis on foreign trade and encourage export-oriented investments to boost foreign-exchange earnings. This strategy imposes certain risks. For example, the government in line with the strategy promotes foreign investments as well as domestic ones. This new attraction of investors for large-scale land investments results in investment farms competing with the local smallholder farmers (Lavers, 2012).
From history we know that due agricultural led development strategy agricultural commodity prices have exhibited a long-term historical decline since 1950 because of the falling exchange-rate versus higher order industrialized goods. Next to that, if development is maintained, Engels Law (the higher the developmental rate, the smaller the percentage of the income spent on food) weakens the demand for agricultural raw materials. Furthermore, overproduction is a common phenomenon in agricultural production leading to crises and falling prices (Conway and Barrier 1988).
Agricultural production in developing economies is highly vulnerable to a range of external stresses and shocks. This vulnerability is even higher since individual development countries have very little control over their external environment, the international market and investment climate (protectionism, growth, terms of trade, cost and availability of foreign credit and capital etc) (Conway and Barrier 1988).
Moreover, Degrassi (2005) mentioned numerous reasons why increased agricultural productivity might not benefit the lower-class rural population, due to institutional failures. Therefore, a strong state is the pre-condition to overcome many of the agricultural risks mentioned above.
Unfortunately, one of the primary tasks of the state: providing security, order, property rights and stability, is not very likely to be a reality in Tigray. The Ethiopian government is very young (constitution in 1995) and does not yet function as the ideal-type of a state. Therefore, the assumption made by foregoing scientists that the state is capable of facilitating the public goods, overcoming Gerschenkronian collective action problems and instantiating the institutional framework needed for proper implication (social and cultural needs included), is doubted.
All of the agricultural developmental strategies (even the market-led-ones) are policies. And policies depend highly on some sort of state-intervention, thus require a strong state. In our rapport we included policy as a catalysator layer into the causal loop diagram as well.
The highest priority for agricultural development should therefore be improving the state of Ethiopia into a well-organized, corruption-free and efficient institution, a very difficult task. In the meantime we assume that state-led development is possible because no
development policy can be executed without the assumption of a working state.
Export
The Tigray Region Plan and Finance Bureau (2003) presented in the Growth & Development plan of 2010/11 - 2014/15 the main goals of regional activities. One of them was “increasing exportable products of agriculture and industry in order to create a stable macroeconomic situation in the country and maintaining sustainable development of the region”.
This goal followed from the observation that some agricultural products significantly contribute to economic development in the region through international export. According to the regional government “this encouraging result indicates the possibility of increasing the contribution of such agricultural products to the economic development of our region if an integrated and intensified effort is made to increase the quality, quantity and competitiveness of these kinds of export of agricultural products”. Road development is assumed to
accelerate this export led economic development. This emphasis of export and the direct relation with road development is the reason we tried to include food_exports in the model as well. But scientists stress the deteriorating effects food export can have on local food
availability and affordability.
Namely, increasing international trade has not always the positive effects it is assumed to have, like supporting agricultural growth and enhancing food security. Often inadequate attention is paid to the institutional foundations of markets and poor
infrastructure, both leading to impeding growth (FAO, 2013). Overall, opening up to international trade means that the country now depends on the high and fluctuating international food prices.
Therefore, in order to open up to international trade appropriate measures need to be taken to make your country competitive to other countries. These measures can be import tariffs, export subsidies and price supports etc. But often these measures have ambiguous effects on domestic increase food prices. For example, in certain circumstances, price supports to farmers will raise prices for staple food and could render net food buyers insecure (FAO, 2003).
Furthermore, if there are “winners” from international trade, that will be particular socio-economic groups and the poor could be excluded from this gains, this can increase inequality, which is in violence of our definition of agricultural development. Due to the complexity of international food exports effects, these effects on the system should not be overlooked and further investigated when determining the effect of road development on agricultural development.
