University of Groningen
China's relationships with Africa re-appraised
Jiang, Bin
IMPORTANT NOTE: You are advised to consult the publisher's version (publisher's PDF) if you wish to cite from it. Please check the document version below.
Document Version
Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record
Publication date: 2019
Link to publication in University of Groningen/UMCG research database
Citation for published version (APA):
Jiang, B. (2019). China's relationships with Africa re-appraised: the lense of domestic experiences in agricultural technology extension and its reflection in China's foreign policy towards Africa. University of Groningen.
Copyright
Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons).
Take-down policy
If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.
Downloaded from the University of Groningen/UMCG research database (Pure): http://www.rug.nl/research/portal. For technical reasons the number of authors shown on this cover page is limited to 10 maximum.
CHAPTER 7
Farmer Participation in the
Agriculture Value Chain and
Agricultural Technology Extension
1. Introduction: a review of the research design for this Study
The previous chapters have illustrated the agricultural parts of the Sino-African development collaboration programmes that are based on Chinese foreign policy towards Africa (Chapter 3), Chinese agricultural domestic development experiences (Chapter 4), agricultural technology extension operations in Hunan province (Chapter 5) and agricultural technology extension operations by China in Tanzania (Chapter 6) under the theoretical framework (Chapter 2) of this study.
As discussed in previous chapters, scholarly views vary on the rationale behind the Sino-African development cooperation, and most of these studies are based on the policy level and lack specific investigations into Sino-African collaboration. Since agriculture is a core field in the Sino-African collaboration programmes, this study focuses on this issue. Also, agricultural technology transfer plays a major role in the Sino-African agricultural development cooperative programmes. To obtain a more detailed perspective into the Sino-African agricultural cooperation programmes, this study uses the implementation status of agricultural technology demonstration centres established by China in Africa in the last two decades.
Meanwhile, in China, agricultural demonstration centres have been operating for three decades. This study compares the operation status of agricultural demonstration centres in both China and Africa, based on value chain and farmer participation perspectives at the field level and a neorealism perspective at the political level, in order to answer the main research question of this study: What are the experiences and lessons that China has implemented domestically and in Africa on agriculture and agricultural technology extension, to what extent this Sino–African agricultural development cooperation is reflected in the Chinese foreign policy goals with a perspective that consist of value chain and farmer participation, differ from the traditional neorealist perspective?
To answer the main research question, there are five, closely-related sub-questions: What is the role of Chinese foreign policy towards Africa in the China-Africa relationship? What are Chinese agricultural development experiences and lessons learnt? What implementations has China employed domestically and in Africa in agricultural technology extension within Sino-African collaboration programmes? What is the nature of Sino-African
agricultural development cooperation? How Sino-African agricultural development cooperation reflected in Chinese foreign policy goals, which offers a new perspective on this relationship?
Consequently, this paper has three parts (Figure 7-1), based on neorealism, value chain, and farmer participation perspectives: a discussion and analysis of Chinese agricultural development experiences, specifically agricultural technology extension (a case study in Hunan province); a review and analysis of the Sino-African agricultural programme, with a special focus on agricultural technology extension (case study in Tanzania); and a discussion and analysis of the rationale and motivation behind Sino-African development cooperation programmes.
In addition, based on the literature review and to answer the research questions, this study has four research hypotheses. First, China and Africa’s agricultural development cooperation is based on the principle of mutual reciprocity and mutual benefit. Second, China primarily transfers agricultural technology to Africa because agricultural technology is an urgent element that African agricultural development needs and agricultural technology is a leading element in agricultural value chains. Third, the Chinese-built agricultural technology demonstration centres are based on successful experiences in Chinese domestic agricultural technology extensions and fulfill local farmers’ requirements. Fourth, China’s domestic development experiences in agriculture are an important guide for China-Africa agricultural development cooperation.
Consequently, the goal of this study is to investigate the Chinese rationale behind Sino-African development cooperation by mapping the inclusion of Chinese domestic agricultural development experiences in technology extensions. It does so by combining value chains and farmer participation perspectives to construct more effective methods for Sino-African development cooperation that are a key supplement to neorealism when analysing international politics. To achieve this research goal, this study uses literature review, secondary data analysis and field investigation (i.e. a mixed method of both qualitative and quantitative approaches).
Figure 7-1: The major content and structure of the book 2. Summary of the previous chapters
According to Figure 7-1, the whole book has three main sections, represented by the first three blue boxes. Then, the research goal is achieved with the help of neorealism, value chain and farmer participation perspectives. The chapters in this box form the contents of the boxes of Figure 7-1, and these boxes, in turn, form a summary of the book’s contents.
2.1 Theoretical base: neorealism, value chain and farmer participation
Chapter 2 discusses the definitions of the three theories (neorealism, value chain, and farmer participation), the reasons for applying these three theories in the study, and the connections between the three theories, namely the theoretical framework of this study.
In this study, neorealism is applied to the political stage, which is further used to analyse the Sino-African relationship and Chinese foreign policy towards Africa. Chapter 2 illustrates the main tenets of neorealism (based on Waltz) and scholarly debates on neorealism. This chapter then applies neorealism arguments to analysing the Sino-African cooperative relationship, concluding that neorealism cannot fully explain the cooperative relationship between China and Africa, especially due to the lack of attention to the economic elements in the current international political system. Therefore, this study uses a value chain perspective to analyse Sino-African
development cooperation in a bid to overcome the omissions of neorealism in the area of economics.
The value chain concept was first proposed by Porter in 1985. Taking into account scholars’ views on value chain, value chain development and pro-poor value chain development intervention, this study posits a definition of agricultural value chain that is ‘a chain that consists of agricultural production, processing, packaging, transportation, marketing and the ultimate goal in analyzing a value chain is to reach consumers’ demands to maximize the value’. In a specific agricultural project, the value chain should include all stakeholder opinions and needs that could add value (Chapter 2). Chapter 2 also organizes the positive perspectives and critiques by scholars on value chains in agricultural development.
The definition of agricultural value chain claims that the value chain should include all stakeholder opinions and needs. Hence, farmers’ involvements are of great importance for adding value. For this reason, this study adds a third theory – farmer participation in analysis of the agricultural value chain, as embodied by the case studies in Hunan and Tanzania. Farmer participation-related tools were implemented, in particular, for data collection during fieldwork. This chapter discusses farmer participation through diverse scholars’ views.
The theoretical framework is shown in Figure 2-4 (Chapter 2). First, the framework applies neorealism in analysing China’s Africa policy and the motivation behind Sino-African agricultural cooperation. Second, value chain and farmer participation are used to analyse Chinese domestic agricultural extension experiences and China-Africa agricultural demonstration centre experiences. Third, the Chinese and Tanzanian cases are compared to understand how Chinese foreign policy goals are reflected in the Sino-African agricultural development cooperation as well as Chinese motivation behind these cooperative programmes.
2.2 Discussion and analysis of Chinese agricultural development experiences
Chapters 4 and 5 focus on the discussion and analysis of Chinese agricultural development experiences. Chapter 4 is about Chinese experiences and lessons learnt in agricultural development since 1949. Chapter 5 presents a case study in the Hunan province that concentrates on agricultural
development and operation of agricultural technology extension systems. These two chapters are closely linked, while Chapter 4 covers China’s general agricultural development and Chapter 5 focuses specifically on Hunan province’s agricultural extension and agricultural development. 1) Summary of Chinese experiences and lessons learnt in agricultural development since 1949
Chapter 4 divides Chinese agricultural development into three phases since 1949. The first phase is from 1949 to 1957, the early days of the foundation of the People’s Republic of China. During this period, significant development of mechanized agriculture occurred, the Chinese government promoted new farming tools and developed water equipment for farmers, and some mechanized state farms were founded.
The following phase, from 1958 to 1978, is called the People’s Commune period. During this period, mistakes by the ‘Left’ caused considerable damage to the development of Chinese agriculture. In particular, all of China suffered serious social and economic damage due to the ‘Great Leap Forward’ and the ‘Cultural Revolution’. During this period, Chinese agriculture entered a long-term stagnation.
Subsequently, after 1978, the Chinese Communist Party realized China’s mistakes, assessed what had happened during the previous period and began to bring order out of chaos. Since then, the Chinese government has implemented a series of reforms to make economic construction the central task of the country. Agricultural extension began early during this period. The agricultural demonstration centre is one of the most important initiatives implemented by China since the 1990s.
Chapter 4, in accordance with a summary of the main contents and characteristics of the aforementioned three phases, discusses the main achievements and current problems of Chinese agricultural development. Since agricultural extension plays a significant role in Chinese agricultural development, this chapter also analyses the relationship between agricultural extension and Chinese agricultural development.
Six main issues in agricultural development are discussed and analysed, and the study also reveals a number of problems to be solved in Chinese agricultural extension. In order to examine solutions, Chapter 4 offers a brief discussion on value chain and farmer participation as a way of resolving
Chinese agricultural extension issues. This introduces further discussion and analysis in Chapter 5.
2) Summary of agricultural development and operation of agricultural technology extension system in Hunan
Chapter 5 explores a case study in Hunan province, China. In accordance with Chapter 4, the first part of Chapter 5 discusses agricultural development in Hunan province since 1949, which is divided into four phases. Unlike the three phases of China’s general agricultural development, Hunan province has witnessed a fourth stage, from the end of the 20th century till now. During this additional fourth phase, Hunan saw the implementation of agricultural extension and agricultural demonstration centres, and subsequently experienced significant improvement in the province’s agricultural development.
The beginning of Chapter 5 demonstrates the reasons for choosing Hunan province’s agricultural extension and agricultural development as a case study. Basically, this is because Hunan’s economic developmental level can be seen as neutral in the context of China as a whole and it was also chosen because of the feasibility of conducting an investigation there.
Next, there is a discussion of the agricultural extension system in Hunan province. This illustration and analysis are based on interviews conducted during the field investigation in the Loudi region. By analysing the administrative mechanisms and policies of Hunan’s agricultural extension, it can be concluded that the agricultural extension administrative system has played a significant role in improving Hunan’s agricultural development process, especially from the 1980s until the 1990s. However, in the last two decades, its effective function is declining. With a view to deeper examination, this study conducts an illustration and analysis of the operation status of local agricultural extension stations based on the outcomes of questionnaires from the field investigation in three villages in the Loudi region.
After discussing the agricultural extension administrative system in Hunan, this chapter discusses Hunan’s agricultural demonstration centres. The discussion focuses on the three phrases in the development process of China’s agricultural demonstration centres and the different categories of these centres in China. This is followed by more specific views and
discussion of the two national agricultural demonstration centres in Hunan, based on field investigations at the Changsha County modern agricultural demonstration centre and the Lianyuan County modern agricultural demonstration centre.
Chapter 5 concludes with an analysis and discussion of three influencing factors on Hunan’s administrative agricultural extension system. Also, based on value chain and farmer participation views, there is an analysis and discussion of the role of agricultural demonstration centres in agricultural extension affairs, which indicates that agricultural demonstration centres are a better choice for agricultural extension in Hunan than the traditional administrative agricultural extension system.
2.3 Discussion on Sino-African agricultural programmes
Chapters 3 and 6 mainly focus on the discussion and analysis of Sino-African agricultural programmes. Chapter 3 focuses on the policy level, and neorealism is also applied to analysing Chinese policy for Africa. Chapter 6 centres around Sino-African agricultural development cooperation and the Chinese agricultural technology demonstration centre in Tanzania. 1) Summary of China’s foreign policy towards Africa
Chapter 3 is about Chinese foreign policy towards Africa. This chapter also discusses the status of major nations that implement development cooperation with Africa, i.e. the US, Russia and the EU. The characteristics of each development cooperation are analysed and compared with Sino-African development cooperation, with a view to promoting new ideas and perspectives for Sino-African development cooperation.
This chapter then illustrates and discusses the four phases in the development process of China’s foreign policy toward Africa since 1949. The first stage occurred from 1949 to 1978, when China and African countries had just won their independence and needed to cooperate to achieve international positions in global politics. Therefore, politics linked China and Africa, and Chinese policy towards Africa mainly focused on political cooperation between China and Africa at this time. Moreover, China assisted Africa in helping African countries gain economic independence from their metropolitan states.
The second phase took place from 1970 to 1989. During this phase, a series of reforms were implemented in China, and the Chinese government started to prioritize economic construction for the country’s development goals. Therefore, a key aspect of Chinese foreign policy towards Africa in this period was linking economic cooperation with political cooperation. This can also be seen as the initiating stage of Sino-African economic and mutual benefit collaboration.
The third phase occurred from 1989 to 2000. This stage saw an increase in long-term Sino-African economic and mutual benefit collaboration. As can be seen in Chinese policy towards Africa during this stage, economic elements were key influencing factors in the China-Africa relationship. The fourth phase has taken place from 2000 until now. This phase consists of a comprehensive development of Sino-African development cooperation, and is due, in particular, to the China-Africa Economic and Trade Cooperation Forum. Policies from China to Africa are all instructed by this forum. As food security is a major issue for most African countries, agricultural collaboration programmes have become an important element of China-Africa cooperation during this phase.
Because agricultural collaboration is an increasing focus for Sino-African development cooperation, this chapter also discusses and analyses China’s policies on development assistance to Africa with a focus on agriculture. By comparing the four key policy files of China towards Africa, the chapter discusses five characteristics that China’s African policy has focused on in the operation of the agricultural technology demonstration centres built by China in Africa. Furthermore, the chapter discussed the implementation system of Chinese foreign assistance and economic cooperation to Africa, including a discussion of the functions of all the major agencies that are involved.
The fifth part of the chapter presents previous scholarly discussions and debates on the elements that have influenced China’s foreign policy towards Africa. It subsequently details analysis based on neorealism. In accordance with these discussions and analyses, this chapter indicates that Waltz’s neorealism theory cannot fully explain the mutual benefits and increasing economic elements within the relationship between China and Africa. 2) Summary of Sino-African agricultural development cooperation and the Chinese agricultural technology demonstration centre in Tanzania
Chapter 6 covers the Sino-African agricultural development cooperation and the Chinese agricultural technology demonstration centre in Tanzania. This chapter starts with the agricultural development experiences in Africa, including African agricultural development paths and major agricultural development issues in Africa since the 1950s. There are three major problems in African agricultural development: serious food security issues, the issue of ecological environmental changes to African land, and the issue of energy shortage in rural Africa.
The next part illustrates agricultural development cooperation between China and Africa with the following four aspects: the Sino-African agricultural development cooperation path, the main elements of Sino-African agricultural cooperation, China and Africa in agricultural technology development cooperation, and the significance of agricultural technology in Sino-African agricultural developmental cooperation.
This is followed by a case study of Chinese-built agricultural technology demonstration centres, and is based on the field investigation in Tanzania. This begins with an analysis of the political background of the Chinese agricultural technology demonstration centre in Africa and then leads to a more specific case study, i.e. the Tanzanian Chinese agricultural technology demonstration centre (TCATDC).
Based on the data collected from fieldwork in Darkawa, Tanzania, this chapter illustrates: the current operation status of the TCATDC, as embodied in its management structure; its development process and the four positions of TCATDC; the current living and working status of Chinese experts in TCATDC; Tanzanian workers’ experiences and stories during their time working at TCATDC; and the experiences of local farmers that joined training courses in TCATDC.
Research analysis based on value chain and farmer participation views indicates that major issues exist in the operation process of TCATDC and examines influencing elements on the status and future development of the TCATDC. It concludes that it is important to combine value chain and farmer participation in the future operations of TCATDC. This means that local farmer participation should be included in all parts of the agribusiness value chain, namely during production, processing, packaging, transportation, marketing and fulfilling consumers’ demands. By analysing the Tanzanian
case study, this section also provides a detailed explanation of how to incorporate farmer participation in an agribusiness value chain.
3. Research Analysis
3.1 Operation of Chinese agricultural technology extension in Hunan according to value chain and farmer participation
In this study, Chapter 5 presents Chinese agricultural technology extension in Hunan province by illustrating four phases in this province’s agricultural development process. Since the end of the 20th century, a new stage in Hunan’s agricultural development, a stage defined by a combination of dynamic mechanisms and a scale economy, has emerged. Hunan’s administrative agricultural extension system is demonstrated and discussed in the Loudi region within the context of this stage.
Subsequently, the chapter analyses the Chinese policies of agricultural extension and the operation and general status of agricultural technology demonstration centres in Hunan. The Loudi region’s administrative agricultural extension system has three influencing factors that pertain to Hunan’s current administrative agricultural extension system: First, all governmental-level policies on agricultural extension and administrative agencies. Second, fewer farmers work on farmlands affected by agricultural administrative extension system operations. Finally, knowledge and technology among workers in local extension agencies are limited, and this has a negative impact on local farmers seeking agricultural technologies and sciences. Furthermore, the role of Hunan’s agricultural demonstration centers relates to a newly developed administrative agricultural extension system that complements traditional methods.
By value chain and farmer participation approaches (Chapter 5.6. Research analysis), one can conclude that, compared to national demonstration centres, the current traditional administrative extension system has not been effectively implemented. Rarely resolved issues persist in the administrative extension system, while demonstration centres seem to present more suitable solutions. As a result, agricultural demonstration centres are a better option for Hunan in expanding agricultural technology and science.
3.2 Operation status of Chinese-built agricultural technology demonstration centre in Tanzania according to value chain and farmer participation
Chapter 6 begins by discussing other major powers’ development cooperation with Africa, and then outlines the operation status of Tanzania’s Chinese-built agricultural technology demonstration centre. Like Sino-African development cooperation, American-African, Russian-African and European-African development cooperation also emphasize agriculture.
However, since different political and economic elements have influenced these collaborative relationships, the characteristics of each cooperation relationship vary. Relationships stemming from American-African development cooperation have differed over time. Currently, the US government offers foreign aid to Africa through bilateral and multilateral assistance.
Current Russian-African development cooperation also hinges on multilateral aid, channelled through the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, the United Nations system and key global programmes as well as funds earmarked for particular purposes. European-African development cooperation has the longest history, and its relationships and characteristics have also differed across phases. The primary forms of EU assistance to Africa are financial assistance, technical assistance, food aid and debt relief.
Chapter 6 demonstrates the policies and principal elements of Sino-African development cooperation, especially in the area of agriculture. It then presents examples of agricultural technology development cooperation. These examples illustrate that agricultural technology development cooperation is a core element of Sino-African agricultural collaboration. China provides aid within Africa for the construction of demonstration farms; it builds agricultural technology demonstration centres in Africa and sends agricultural experts to Africa to offer technologies to African farmers.
The Tanzanian Chinese Agricultural Technology Demonstration Centre (hereafter referred to as TCATDC) is one of 14 such agricultural technology demonstration centres that China promised to construct on the African continent. A field investigation and data analysis reveal that the TCATDC has reported substantive achievements. For example, many Chinese
advanced agricultural technologies have been transferred to Tanzanian farmers and deployed in crop production. Nevertheless, three major issues71 have arisen at the political level, economic level, and livelihood and working conditions that must be resolved to facilitate better TCATDC operations. Moreover, it should be noted that the TCATDC is currently in limbo as the technical cooperation phase has ended, but the commercial operation phase has not yet commenced.
Based on value chain and farmer participation perspectives, TCATDC’s future projects should consider all stakeholder views, but also factors prominent in agricultural production, processing, packaging, transportation, and marketing. The ultimate aim of value chain analysis is to determine and reach consumers’ needs. Additionally, farmer participation is an influential element in agribusiness value chains. Farmer participation in the TCATDC’s value chains is crucial if the centre is looking to make a profit and transfer technology simultaneously during the commercial phase. Identifying stakeholders’ demands and their effects on the value chain is an important aspect of the participation perspective.
3.3 Hunan’s case vs. Tanzanian case: Chinese developmental experiences and lessons
Chapter 5 focuses on Hunan province, while Chapter 6 concentrates on Tanzania. The current section compares the implementation status of the two initiatives to establish agricultural demonstration centres in Hunan and Tanzania in order to discern how Chinese developmental experiences and lessons have been embodied in Sino-African agricultural technology development cooperation programmes.
1) Hunan’s case vs. Tanzanian case: Five factors
Five factors are compared between the two case contexts. First, the developmental phases of Hunan and Tanzania’s agricultural demonstration centres will be compared. Second, the policy bases of the agricultural demonstration centres are juxtaposed. Third, major implementation differences in Hunan and Tanzania’s demonstration centres will be discussed. Fourth, the achievements and current issues of both centres are considered.
Finally, future development plans for each demonstration centre will be compared.
First, let us compare the developmental phases of the agricultural demonstration centres in both the Hunan case and the Tanzanian case. Chapter 5 illustrates the three developmental stages of Chinese agricultural demonstration centres in Table 7-1. The two demonstration centres in Hunan belong, respectively, to the first and the third tranches of centres approved by the Ministry of Agriculture. The development process of the Hunan case study should be considered in comparison to the development phases of agricultural demonstration centres in other regions of China.
Time Characteristics of this stage Major stage events 2001 to 2007 Pilot construction of national
agricultural technology parks is implemented.
National Agricultural Technology Park Steering Group and Joint Office of the National Agricultural Science & Technology Center are founded.
Agricultural Science and Technology Park Guide and management (trial) issued.
First and second batches of national agricultural technology parks are constructed.
2008 to 2011 Comprehensive promotion of national agricultural parks.
Achievements in different aspects.
Construction of the third and the fourth batches of national agricultural demonstration centres begins.
Since 2012 Development of national agricultural demonstration zones enters innovation and development stage
46 national agricultural technology centres are approved.
‘one city, two zones and a hundred parks project’ (also known as ‘one-two-one project’) is proposed.
Table 7-1 The three development phases of Chinese agricultural demonstration centres72
72
Based on the three batches of national agricultural demonstration centres announced by the PRC’s Ministry of Agriculture,
http://jiuban.moa.gov.cn/zwllm/ghjh/201502/t20150204_4395843.htm (Accessed on: 02-02-2017).
In Tanzania’s case, the TCATDC was implemented within the larger context of Sino-African development cooperation. Tanzania’s centre belongs to the first batch of agricultural demonstration centres that China promised to build on the African continent. As outlined in Chapter 6 (Figure 6-1), the TCATDC has progressed through several different developmental stages, including construction (October 2009 to April 2011), technical cooperation (March 2012 to May 2015), and commercial operation phase (not yet initiated). Because of this delay in phase three, the TCATDC is currently experiencing a relatively confusing period referred to as a ‘free phase’.
Next, the policy bases of the two agricultural demonstration centres are compared. Hunan’s agricultural demonstration centres or regions were created via Chinese agricultural and technological policies. The primary policies and their agricultural extension and demonstration related content are presented in Table 7-2.
Name of the policy Agricultural extension and demonstration related contents Agriculture Law of People’s Republic of
China (2013)
Article 51, ‘national agricultural extension agencies should depend on the agricultural technology experimental demonstration bases, and also agricultural extension agencies should be responsible for the extension and demonstration of key technologies’.
Proposal on deepen and strengthen the construction of basic levels’ agricultural technology extension system (2006)
This policy’s main goal is gradual buildup of a vibrant and diverse basic agricultural technology extension system across China. Outline for the Development of
Agricultural Science and Technology (2001-2010)
the National Conference of Agricultural Science and Technology labelled construction of agricultural science and technology centers or regions as major scientific and technological action.
Agricultural Science and Technology Park Guide and management (trial)
Issued by the National Agricultural Technology Park Steering Group and joint office of the National Agricultural Science & Technology Centre
Table 7-2 Major Chinese agricultural policies and their agricultural extension and demonstration related content
In contrast, the policy background in the Tanzanian case study is based on the framework of Sino-African developmental cooperation and specific policies linked to agriculture. China’s agricultural assistance to Africa began
in 1959, and since then, Sino-African agricultural developmental cooperation has progressed through three phases73 (Li, Qi, Tang, 2010).
Chapter 3 illustrates the development of China’s African foreign policy since 1949, which is discussed as having four phases, and the key policies are also analysed in an agricultural context in part 2.5 of Chapter 3. A comparison of these policy files concludes that the relationship with Africa is a key part of China’s foreign aid policy, and economic elements are increasingly influencing Sino-African collaboration; moreover, the implementation of agricultural demonstration centres has drawn much attention to China’s African policy.
To answer the question, ‘what major implementations have occurred in Hunan and Tanzania’s demonstration centres?’, we must consult Chapters 5 and 6. In Hunan, analysis of the two operational status of the Changsha County and Lianyuan County national agricultural demonstration centres demonstrates that these two centres play a positive role in local agricultural development. The majority of these centres’ agribusinesses are in the ‘enterprise + base + farmers’ mode. Within this mode, many agricultural cooperatives have been established and a growing number of rural residents have joined them. Advanced agricultural sciences and technologies are applied to production within these agribusinesses and cooperatives and, as a result, these agricultural demonstration centres have played pivotal roles in agricultural technology extension.
In comparison, Chinese experts report that Tanzanian workers are working at TCATDC and local farmers are participating in TCATDC training courses. The TCATDC has implemented its projects in line with the following four positions: mutual political trust, communication of technologies, agricultural extension, and promotion of the development of Chinese enterprises. During the centres three-year technical cooperation phase, 11 Chinese experts, resident long-term, trained more than 2,500 Tanzanians via formal training courses. Since 2015, when the technical cooperation phase ended, and a long wait began for the next stage, the centre has continued to offer training courses to Tanzanians with help from the Tanzanian government.
Tanzanian TCATDC workers and local farmers who have participated in the centre’s training course report appreciation for Chinese agricultural technologies, especially those technologies that have resulted in increases in crop production. Unlike the Hunan centres, the TCATDC currently remains under government control. The Hunan centers now operate automatically via ‘commercial + technology transferring’ mechanisms.
A comparison of the achievements and issues relating to both cases is merited. Several of these achievements have been discussed in the above paragraphs, so this comparison is limited to current issues that need to be resolved in both centres. As the analysis in Chapter 5 shows, Hunan’s current administrative agricultural extension system is not being effectively implemented at various levels. These demonstration centres play an increasingly significant role in agricultural development and technology extension, and the government should dedicate political and economic attention to their future development.
The issues associated with the TCATDC are more complicated. Because this project is the product of a cooperation programme between China and Tanzania, every decision and implementation must be approved by both nations. In addition, in this era of globalization, while cooperation from multiple sides can prove more effective in economically, politically more time is often needed to establish mutual understandings. Such problems should be solved, as, according to neorealism, national interests remain a major factor in current international relationships. It is safe to say that the current delay in moving TCATDC to the third, commercial phase is an example of such problems.
Finally, this research compares the future development plans of the two case study demonstration centres. Hunan’s multiple agricultural demonstration centres (and especially its national centres) are playing a more promising role in both agricultural technology extension and agricultural development. Indeed, demonstration centres may replace the current extension stations within the administrative agricultural extension systems, as technology extension is a key function already covered by the demonstration system and is more effective in terms of influencing agricultural development.
In Tanzania, the TCATDEC plans to begin its commercial stage via both profit seeking and agricultural technology transfer. Value chain and
farmer participation perspective analysis indicate three current obstacles to these goals. These obstacles pertain to politics, economics and livelihood. Any solutions to these issues must combine agribusiness agricultural value chain and local farmers’ participation in order to create a farmer participation value chain approach.
2) SWOT analysis and comparison
Chapter 5 discusses and analyses the development of Hunan’s agricultural demonstration centre in accordance with the fieldwork conducted at the Changsha County and Lianyuan County modern agricultural demonstration centres. Based on the interview data collected, which is presented as a SWOT analysis in Figure 7-2, the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats to these demonstration centres are illustrated as follows:
First, the strengths of Chinese agricultural demonstration centres are closely linked to the opportunities they present. The ‘enterprise + base + farmer’74
model offers job opportunities for local farmers and enables agricultural technologies to be efficiently delivered to local farmers involved in the enterprise and producing base. Centres are further strengthened by increased farmer participation and added value in centre operations, and this, in turn, improves the industrialization of Chinese agriculture and Chinese rural development.
Improved Chinese agricultural industrialization that results from Chinese agricultural demonstration centres can efficiently transform small-scale farming into large-scale agriculture. Agricultural industrialization executes the technological transformation of traditional agriculture and promotes the development of agricultural science and technology. With the input of new technologies via the operation of agricultural demonstration centres, Chinese agricultural industrialization has continued to develop. Moreover, due to technology transfer and job opportunities, Chinese rural development has benefitted from the centres through increased farmer incomes and livelihood improvement.
Figure 7-2 SWOT analysis for Chinese agricultural demonstration centre Still, several weaknesses threaten the operation of Chinese agricultural demonstration centres. China is an expansive country, and the development of agricultural industries varies drastically across different regions. Each region must adapt this development mode to fit its own situation.
Figure 7-3 illustrates a SWOT analysis chart with respect to Tanzania’s Chinese-built agricultural technology demonstration centre. This centre’s strengths, opportunities, weaknesses and threats are discussed in the following paragraphs.
The strengths and opportunities of the Tanzanian centre are intricately connected. The centre’s ability to communicate and transfer agricultural technology to locals directly contributes to agricultural development within local Tanzanian communities. In addition, the operation of the Chinese-built agricultural technology demonstration centre has created job opportunities
for local residents (as specifically demonstrated in Chapter 6). Finally, as agricultural technologies are transferred to Tanzania, the country’s food security rises.
The second strength of the Tanzanian centre is the mutual political trust that it develops between China and Tanzania. Thus, the centre not only enhances relations between the two nations, but also facilitates economic cooperation. This presents excellent opportunities for Chinese enterprises to conduct business in Tanzania.
In contrast, Tanzania’s centre also exhibits two key weaknesses. First, the centre’s scale is limited and cannot cover all the local farmers in the short-term, even though many local farmers need the agricultural technologies offered by the centre. The second weakness relates to the Chinese agricultural technology experts residing at the centre long term. Most of these experts’ family members live in China, and the experts’ long stays in Tanzania prove personally difficult.
There is one threat to the operation of Tanzania’s demonstration: the status of its future developmental plan. As illustrated in Chapter 6, the technical cooperation phase of TCATDC has ended, but the initiation of phase three remains in question. This commercial phase includes more factors and further consideration than the previous two phases. In the previous two phases, political factors took centre stage in the TCATDC’s operation, but in phase three, not only political factors, but also economic factors must be weighed to allow for the future operation of the centre. 3) Comparison of the two SWOT analyses
These two SWOT analyses demonstrate distinct outcomes for the two cases. In the ‘Strengths’ quatrain, the Hunan demonstration centres reported ‘enterprise + base + farmer’ model, increased farmer participation and added value. The Tanzanian centre’s has facilitated agricultural technology communication and transfer to locals and fostered mutual political trust between China and Tanzania. The differences between the two case studies stem from the fact that the Hunan centre was established as a result of one government’s policies, while the Tanzanian centre is the product of two countries’ policies and cooperation.
Figure 7-3 SWOT analysis for Chinese agricultural technology demonstration centre in Tanzania
The weaknesses also varied between the two cases. In China, the weaknesses centred around regional variation. In Tanzania, the limitations of the centre’s scale and the Chinese experts’ long stays in Tanzania away from family were documented. These differences primarily stem from differences in national conditions.
Analysis of Hunan’s opportunities revealed job opportunities for local farmers, efficient strategies for agricultural science and technology extension, improvement in the industrialization of Chinese agriculture, and increased Chinese rural development. In Tanzania, the main opportunities presented by the centre included agricultural development for local communities, job opportunities for local farmers, business opportunities for Chinese enterprises, and food security improvement. The similarities between the
opportunities presented by both cases’ centres are apparent. Both Hunan’s and Tanzania’s demonstration centres offer job opportunities for local farmers and improve agricultural development.
Finally, the threats associated with the Hunan case study chiefly pertain to financial issues resulting from scaling and marketing problems. In contrast, the ‘threat’ to the Tanzanian demonstration centre is its undetermined plans for future development. Differences in these threats stem from different operation statuses within the two countries. Hunan demonstration centres now primarily operate for economic elements, while the Tanzanian demonstration centre initially operated for the development cooperation and economic elements will not be implemented until a future development stage.
This comparison of these two SWOT analyses unearths several key differences between this study’s two case contexts. Based on value chain and farmer participation perspectives analyses on the two case studies in Chapters 5 and 6, respectively, these differences are due to variation in the operation status of the Hunan and Tanzanian demonstration centres; the different national conditions of China and Tanzania also lead to the differences in these two SWOT analyses.
4) Chinese developmental experiences and lessons for Tanzania?
This section addresses the question ‘how are Chinese developmental experiences and lessons embodied in Tanzania?’ by comparing the Hunan and Tanzanian case studies. Table 7-3 demonstrates Chinese development experiences and lessons reflected in the Tanzanian case in four categories.
4. Analysis based on the research hypothesis
As presented in Chapter 1, this study’s main research question is, ‘what are the similarities and differences in the China’s implementation of agricultural technology extension domestically and in Africa, and how Chinese foreign policy goals and Chinese experiences in agricultural technology extension have been reflected in the China-Africa agricultural development cooperation?’ To answer these research questions, four research hypotheses were presented. Following consideration of these hypotheses, the whole study is considered concerning answering the question, ‘is there a more inclusive strategy for Sino-African agricultural collaboration programmes?’.
Categories Chinese experiences and lessons Reflection in Tanzania Following policy goals Major implementations of the development of Hunan demonstration centres follow the policy goals of the Chinese central government.
The construction and operation of the TCATDC is an outcome of the policy goals of China’s foreign aid policy and China’s foreign policy towards Africa. In addition, the centre adheres to Tanzanian agricultural development policy. Technology and science in a core position for development This is a key developmental experiences in Chinese agricultural development process.
The long-term stationing of Chinese experts in Tanzania to training local farmers with farming technologies.
Government in a leading position
The administrative agricultural extension system initially played an important role in Chinese agricultural development; however, as economic growth continued and the Chinese economic development mode transformed, the marking elements are increasingly important in agricultural development.
In TCATDC’s first two development processes, the Chinese government and Tanzanian government took leading positions. However, the third stage of the TCATDC places greater emphasis on value chain, marketing and economic elements. These should be valued above political factors, as that is better for the consistent development of the TCATDC.
The functions of the value chain development and participation of farmers strengthen and improve the sustainable
development of demonstration centres
In the Hunan case, research analysis is concentrated on the value chain and farmer participation perspectives. Agricultural demonstration centres are a better option in agricultural technology and science extension than traditional agricultural extension stations.
In TCATDC’s future development plan, there should be comprehensive consideration of value chain development and farmer participation in order to establish a farmer participation value chain approach.
Table 7-3 The Chinese developmental experiences and lessons reflected in Tanzania
4.1 Discussion and analysis of the research hypothesis
1) Neorealism cannot fully explain China and Africa relations, and in the area of agricultural development cooperation, which is based on the principle of mutual reciprocity and mutual benefit.
China’s foreign aid policy (White Paper, 2011) discusses economic cooperation and development as a ‘mutually beneficial and win-win scenario
by cooperating with other developing countries in the aspect of economy and technology’. In this same policy file, China promises to build 30 agricultural
demonstration centres in developing countries within five years. Later, in China’s 2014 Foreign Aid White Paper, these agricultural demonstration centres became an important platform for Chinese foreign assistance in agriculture. Agricultural development cooperation has been a primary focus of China’s African policy. In the agricultural field, the export of Chinese methods to Africa is akin to development assistance to Africa and implementation involves sending Chinese experts to Africa and building agricultural technology demonstration centres.
As Sino-African agricultural development cooperation has been implemented, it has drawn increasing attention globally. Critics have argued that pure assistance work is not sustainable, and the best strategy for inspiring prosperous development with the TCATDC (as in the Tanzanian case study) is to promote mutual economic benefit by moving the centre into its commercial phase.
Neorealists tend to perceive Sino-African agricultural cooperation as a strategy employed by China to gain global influence. However, neorealism’s extreme emphasis on nations’ political power overlooks human-centred development and economic factors (such as the importance of cooperation) in international relations. This leads neorealists to neglect the individual importance and potential power of international cooperation in the transformation of the international political system. As a result, this study supports the first hypothesis.
2) The main reason for China transferring agricultural technology to Africa is because it believes it is urgently needed for African agricultural development and a leading element in the agricultural value chain.
Part of Chapter 6 concentrates on the main issues of African agricultural development since the 1950s. These issues are food security, ecological environmental changes and energy shortages in rural areas. Science and technology must be deployed to develop solutions to address these major problems.
Agricultural science and technology have proven fundamental to the success of Chinese agricultural development. This development not only reflects the Chinese administrative agricultural extension system, but also the creative operations of agricultural technology demonstration centres.
The connection between China’s transfer of agricultural technology to Africa and demand for African agricultural development is evident. In addition, agricultural technology is a primary inducer of added value within the value chain analysis for the future development of Hunan’s agricultural demonstration centres and the TCATDC. In response to this study’s second hypothesis, the primary reason for China’s transfer of agricultural technology to Africa is because agricultural technology is urgently required for African agricultural development and is a leading component in agricultural value chains.
3) The Chinese-built agricultural technology demonstration centre is based on successful experiences in Chinese domestic agricultural technology extension (concerning value chain and farmer participation views) and is partially meeting local farmers’ requirements and participation in Africa. An analysis of hypothesis 3 is complex: On the one hand, Chinese agricultural extension has achieved remarkable results, despite the various issues examined in Chapter 5. Therefore, this study positively confirms the first part of its third hypothesis.
On the other hand, the Tanzanian Chinese-built agricultural technology demonstration centre is currently in limbo and operating in a ‘free time’ stage. According to interviews with local farmers who have attended TCATDC training courses, these training courses are effective in improving agricultural growth. However, they are also clear that they require more and longer courses in future. As a result, part two of this study’s third hypothesis is considered partially positive.
4) The Chinese domestic development experiences in agriculture can only be partially implemented in Sino-African agricultural collaborative programmes, because national conditions play an important role.
Previous illustrations and analysis of the Hunan and Tanzanian cases demonstrate that China’s domestic developmental agricultural experiences
have had a powerful influence on China’s implementations in Tanzania within the context of Sino-African agricultural development collaboration.
However, the national conditions of China and Tanzania are vastly different. Chinese domestic experiences and lessons are rooted in the country’s own national conditions. The case studies show that the lessons learnt are embodied in the Chinese agricultural demonstration centres in both Hunan and Tanzania.
Furthermore, because TCATDC has reported both achievements and issues, the identification of more sustainable and mutually beneficial strategies is crucial to not only TCATDC’s development, but all similar cooperative projects. Incorporating third parties is a suitable solution for the comprehensive and globalized development of similar development cooperation programmes. Hence, this study has deemed this hypothesis positive. In the following chapter, a detailed conclusion based on this study’s two case studies outlines what Africans can learn from China’s agricultural development.
4.2 Is there a more inclusive way for Sino-African agricultural collaboration programs?
As evidenced in the value chain and farmer participation analysis in Chapters 5 and 6, the link between these two perspectives is of great importance in both Hunan and Tanzania. To add value, all stakeholders’ views and demands must be considered within agricultural collaboration programmes. Local farmers are key stakeholders in the agricultural value chain, and the inclusion of both the value chain and farmer participation into a farmer-participated-value chain approach is crucial.
The farmer-participated-value chain approach can be defined as a combination of the agribusiness agricultural value chain and local farmer participation. It seeks to maximize the value of agribusiness operations and comprehensively considers local farmers’ requirements and ideas.
The implementation of the farmer-participated-value chain approach is meaningful within Sino-African agricultural collaboration programmes. In line with the goals of China’s foreign policy towards Africa, this approach constructs mutually beneficial and increased value added cooperation for all parties.
The following chapter discusses strategies for agricultural technology extension development by considering Chinese experiences and lessons within the context of China-Africa collaboration programmes. Previous chapters are reviewed and summarized, and the study is concluded.
5. Conclusion
5.1 What can Africa learn from China’s agricultural development?
Chinese agriculture, through long-term practices, has accumulated plenty of experience and lessons in the development processes that are significant to African countries trying to develop their agriculture. It can also be an important guide for solving the problem of food security in Africa. Ravallion (2009) states that, as a developing country, over the past 25 years, China has made great progress in the area of poverty reduction.
1) On smallholder operations
Smallholder operations is an issue in both Chinese and African agriculture. The Chinese peasant economy has been gradually transformed into a “high input - high output” model. By contrast, the African peasant economy has fallen into a “low input - low output” trap (Li, Qi, Tang, 2010). The long-term intensive relationship between humans and land urges smallholders to intensively farm the land. Li, Guo and Wu (2011) state that the historical method of intensive cultivation is still essential. This method can enhance the productivity of land; however, it also exploits excessively the resources of woodlands, grasslands, wetlands and so on.
There is a dual structure in terms of the simultaneous existence of a backward and non-self-sufficient smallholder food production system and a modern, economic crop production system for the interruption of agricultural civilization. In this structure, modern management and modern technology cannot be integrated into the system of smallholder production. Agricultural policies, agricultural inputs and the promotion and adoption of agricultural science and technology are all based on the gradual transformation of smallholders into agricultural production units with continuously improving levels of productivity, which has already occurred in China.
However, the plantation-style crop production system of Western colonizers has not become the main structure of African agriculture, meaning that Africa still has many virgin land resources today. Therefore,
even under the premise of not increasing the yield per unit area, the intense situation of African food security can be greatly relieved just by improving the utilization of arable land. The comparative interest in the additional inputs to African land is very high in the current case of very low level inputs, indicating a great potential to solve the problem of African food security.
However, the development of modern agricultural technology has resulted in Chinese agriculture developing a pattern of high input-high output. The extensive input of fertilizers, pesticides and other modern production factors causes serious environmental pollution and destruction, which should be considered carefully by African countries. Tang, Zhao, and Wang (2011) state that, in this process, China first epitaxially exploits the land resource and then intensively utilizes it. While maximally using natural resources, China also excessively uses natural resources, causing huge problems for the sustainable development of China’s agriculture. However, land resources have not been destructively utilized in Africa, whether from the epitaxial perspective or the intensive perspective. This objectively provides relatively favorable conditions for the future sustainable development of African agriculture.
2) On strategies and policies of agricultural development
The strategies and policies of agricultural development are different in China and Africa. Food production is considered the core of agricultural and national development in the Chinese experience, and is fully reflected in the sequence of reform priorities. Even with a weak economic foundation, China has built an agro-industry system, especially in the production and distribution system of fertilizers, pesticides and seeds, implemented via a large-scale agricultural infrastructure, including the construction of large water conservancy projects, roads, markets and storage facilities (Li, Guo, Wu, 2011).
The incidence of poverty remains high in African rural regions, which means that there is huge potential to reduce poverty through agricultural development or the improvement of agricultural productivity. Tang, Zhao, Wang (2011) state that African countries still lack relative political commitment to meet the demands from agricultural sectors. Agricultural
strategies and policies are always key agenda points for African countries and in terms of engaging support from international organizations to Africa. The agenda of external support is not integrated well with local African strategies and Africa’s own strategies and policies cannot be implemented due to low funds and the lack of capacity in terms of policy implementation. Accordingly, Africa does not have a consistent and continuous system of strategies and policies and remains heavily dependent on a framework of external development assistance (Li, Tang, Xu, 2013). China’s experience shows that this can only be solved only by formulating a system of strategies and policies that fit national conditions and that can rely primarily on, is reliant on mainly depends on its own abilities.
The strategies and policies of agricultural development in both China and Africa have their own lessons. Li, Guo, and Wu (2011) state that China’s long-term strategic positioning of priorities for urban and industrial development is a root cause of various social problems in transitional China, exacerbating the income gap between city and countryside and between regions. In the strategic direction of emphasizing food security in agricultural production, the land system of separating ownership and usage rights, as well as the household registration system of urban and rural segmentation, promotes the continuous improvement of land productivity but does not benefit the vital interests of farmers, exposing various problems of surplus and mobile labour when productive forces reach a certain level (Tang, Zhao, Wang, 2011). China will need to pay huge economic and social costs to reverse the negative effects caused by past strategies and policies.
Africa seeks to promote industrialization and urbanization at the expense of agriculture as a precondition similar to China. There are also the problems of a floating population, endophytic colonization, waste of resources, etc. However, Li, Guo, and Wu (2011) indicate that the ability of African governments to solve these problems is relatively weak, which means that they cannot be fundamentally solved through market regulation and external forces. Meanwhile, Li, Tang, and Xu (2013) state that Africa, which has a rich stock of available resources and potential for agricultural production, can allocate resources and mobilize society through effective policies and absorbing the experiences and lessons from Chinese agricultural development, ultimately achieving sustainable development of agricultural production.
3) On agricultural science and technology
Agricultural science and technology is an important aspect of the successful experience of Chinese agricultural development. In the research of Li, Qi, and Tang (2010), Chinese policies on technology research and development and technology promotion have similar administrative mobilizing features to other sector policies, and have the ability to touch scattered farmers rapidly under China’s unique social and political system. China has helped Africa to build promotion stations for agricultural technology since 1979, aiming to teach practical techniques of agricultural production to Africa, learned through the successful rapid spread and transformation into the agricultural production capacity of Chinese agricultural technology.
Qi and Luo (2011) claim that Chinese experimental agricultural technology stations form one part of the improved system of Chinese agricultural technology promotion, where technology demonstrations can be quickly spread to end-user farmers using the country’s strong financial and administrative support capabilities as well as well-trained technical staff. Tang, Zhao, and Wang (2011) further state that an effective system of agricultural technology extension has not yet been built in most African countries. In addition, Li, Guo, and Wu (2011) say that the effective dissemination and diffusion mechanism of the demonstration technology is absent in experimental agricultural technology stations, and thus is unable to effectively promote technology.
4) How should Africa learn from Chinese agricultural development experiences?
Although Chinese agriculture is developing rapidly, over-cultivation, climate issues and environmental issues have resulted from the misuse of land, water and other resources. While the Chinese government has initiated some relevant measures to solve these problems, a high price will still be paid.75 African countries should heed these lessons from China to avoid similar issues.
Therefore, Africa must be prudent in learning from the successful experience of Chinese agriculture. For example, the Chinese long-term agricultural policy of food production as a precondition has guaranteed
national food security and increased food production, but sacrificed the growth of farmer income. Although the Chinese agricultural production system of “high input - high output” has significantly contributed to food security, it has irreversibly impacted the environment and resources.
Generally speaking, Africa should not copy or imitate China's experience, whether at the national strategy level, or at a small-scale household level. It should be noted again that Africa is a continent composed of more than 50 countries, while China is a unified country. The Chinese experience of agricultural development must be adapted by Africa, a continent with tremendously different situations, in a way similar to China’s reforms over its long history.
With a rich stock of land resources and agriculture with latent productive capacity, Africa can achieve sustainable development of agricultural production by using relevant policy measures to allocate resources and mobilize society while paying attention to lessons from the development of Chinese agriculture.
5.2 The role of agricultural technology in China-Africa agricultural collaboration programmes
First, to find out what motivates China’s efforts to transfer agricultural technology in Sino-African agricultural development cooperation, this study chose to examine the Chinese agriculture technology demonstration centre in Tanzania, which has a main goal of technology transfer. This was done by analysing, using the value chain and farmer participation approaches, the current status of the centre, the main obstacles to the center’s operation, and the centre’s plans for further development.
The current status of the TCATDC can be categorized as ‘free time,’ because it is at the end of the technical cooperation phase and has not yet entered the commercial operation phase. With this status in mind, there are three obstacles at the political, economic and livelihood levels that must be solved. Additionally, the solutions need to be based on and be a combination of the agribusiness agricultural value chain and local farmer participation, also called the farmer participated value chain approach.
Agricultural technology transfer and profit making are the two main goals for future commercial operation of the TCATDC. The stakeholders for this new stage have been analysed in chapter 7, considering all stakeholders’
