It Is Not Population Growth Alone But The Deprivation Of Opportunities And Deterioration Of Human Capital : Alarming Famine Bells In Sidama Land.
By
Mulugeta Daye
Coventry
University
Photo from https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=459937104040289&set=pb.100000720098450.-2207520000.1383745439.&type=3&theater |
Introduction
For
Malthusian apologists and those incapable leaders to feed their
people, Population growth is the main reason to blame for famine
causation. The assumed linkage among famine, starvation, and mass
mortality in both popular conceptions and technical definitions stems
directly from the debate started by Malthus more than two centuries
ago. Yet as more nuanced analyses have recently demonstrated, famine
can occur in varying degrees of severity well before critical food
shortages become evident. For example, villagers in Sudan distinguish
a “famine that kills” from a range of other food crises
experienced at the household level that may cause hunger and
destitution but not necessarily lead to death (de Waal 2004).
This
means without creating window of opportunities to human capital
building through, education, health facilities, fair job
opportunities, population growth may contribute to pressure on
available livelihood assets and opportunities in a political system
characterized by marginalization and exclusion of majority and
inclusion and standing for the interests of few. This in conjunction
with other factors that accelerate the deterioration of the human
capital and capabilities of individuals, households and communities
in a given society can make them less resilient and vulnerability to
famine.
This
article challenges the Malthusian approach by taking the case of the
Sidama where party affiliates take all opportunities while window of
opportunities are closed for majorities who remain neutral and have a
tendency to oppose the regime.
One
of reasoning on the negative effect of population pressure on
economic growth and vulnerability to famine is associated with
inequalities in income distribution at a national level. Brown for
instance, writes:
Looking
at the world of the early seventies, one is struck with the sobering
realization that it appears to be losing its capacity to feed itself.
The reasons include, on the demand side, the impact of rising
influence and the rapid population growth. The annual increase for
the demand for food is now immense. Yet the earth is no larger today
than it was a generation ago... Currently the resources used to
expand food production –land, water, energy fertilizer are all
scarce. There are opportunities for expanding cultivated area, but
most of the good crop land in the world is already under the plough,
and much of the additional area that could be brought into use is
marginal. (Brown 1975:11)
While
those few people who are backed by political actors and have
sufficient means ( capital, means of production) have monopolized
fertile and good land, those who are not backed by political actors
and without a means are pushed into marginal and less productive
areas, where they fail to produce enough for their subsistence.
Malthus
and his adherents have faced vigorous criticism. Among the
contra-Malthusian approaches with which traditional Malthusian theory
is confronted, we can mention first the ‘Boserup effect’, whereby
growth in population numbers and concentration gives private and
public, as well as non-governmental organization the confidence to
invest in rural infrastructure such as roads and irrigation schemes,
which consequently decreases vulnerability, Richards (1983: 4) writes
that ‘population, resources and technology may be linked together
in a progressive manner. Population pressure provides a useful
economic stimulus to technical innovation ... Her [Boserup’s] claim
is that population pressure is a general precondition for
agricultural progress, and agricultural progress allows unprecedented
levels of population concentration to be achieved’ (ibid.).
(Woldemariam 1984) writes:
“The
problem of famine is not necessarily and solely related to population
growth. Many countries in Western Europe, Tsarist Russia, and China
have histories of famine, now in the same countries, in spite of much
larger populations, famine does not occur. This, certainly, is
sufficient to exclude population growth as the cause of famine”
(woldemariam 1984: 141).
Furthermore,
contrary to Malthus’s predictions, however, famines have not
limited population growth to any significant extent over history
(Devereux 2001 a,b). Largely because of Malthus’s influence, “the
criterion of famine became a measurable increase in the death rate of
an aggregation of individuals, diagnosed by medical professionals as
being due to starvation and causally related to a measurable decrease
in the availability of food” (de Waal 1989: 17–18).
Both
views (pro- and contra-Malthus) have a measure of validity in
discussing the impact of demographic pressure in terms of retarding
or enhancing economic growth. On the one hand, the level of economic
development and technological advancement, as well as the fair
distribution of existing livelihood assets among the population,
matters more than population pressure per se. Nevertheless,
there is a grain of truth in the Malthusian theory that demographic
pressure has a negative impact on economic growth and increases
vulnerability to famine if the human capital and capability of
growing population is not built with growing needs.
1)Differential
Building Human capital
Human
capital is vital for the poor who earn their living from their
labour. For anyone who is healthy and fit to do things. The skill and
knowledge component of the human capital can be created, fostered and
sustained though education. In rural context of developing countries,
skills and knowledge can be created mostly by non-formal and informal
education. In this context trainees’ are expected, to observe and
act, attentively, repeat the action frequently to muster perfection.
The trainers and educators are parents, peers, siblings and senior
citizens of the society. In this processes of skill and knowledge
creation, fostering and sustaining, the trainers and educators are
respected and followed for their coaching, supervision, comments and
leadership.
The
politcal actors who are in charge of making policy of health and
education play vital role in creating opportunies and constraints in
enhancing human capital and capabilities. Those who are benenfited
from opportunities can build their human capital, while those who are
constrained in the processes of accesssing education and health
facilities will be deprived.
Deprivation
of quality education and health are the first steps to deterioration
of human capital. Because, without required skills and knowledge on
one hand, physical and mental fitness on the other, it will be very
difficult to do available jobs, to be employed, self-employment to
generate income to live on. Failure to generate income and
consequently failure to access food, nutrition and other basics of
life, will create a dark days ahead of lives and livelihoods of
individuals, households, and communities unless external intervention
and support organized, this paves the way for famine. There are
various possible causes of human capital deteriorations. This can be
divided into at least four forms.
Primarily,
technical deterioration:-refers to the situation where by the
workers for some reason may lose skills and capability they had
before. Technical deterioration can occur as the consequence of wear
of skills due to aging, or illness that may be related to working
conditions, that can be adjusted by power holders.
Secondly,
livelihood deterioration:- refers to the loss of the value for
workers’ human capital; the waste away of skills due to
insufficient use and misplacement of the skilled person, giving him
lower position, mainly due to individuals’ relationship to power
holders.
Thirdly,
structural shift:- it entails diversification of activities
for livelihood risk spreading and other motives such as profit
maximization and accumulation. This can lead to job-specific
obsolescence due to technological and activity change;
sector-specific obsolescence due to shifts in the type of
engagements. In the rural context from on- farm to off-farm
livelihood; livelihood -specific skills obsolescence due to
displacement and migration.
Fourthly,
lack of incentives:- declining returns such us honor, prestige
or income, that comes from retaining old or existing human capital in
the face of new skills, knowledge and wisdom that is displacing the
old and obsolete skills and knowledge leading to diversification of
livelihood activities.
Extensive
literature has been produced on livelihood diversification since the
1990s with the introduction of the livelihood framework. After case
studies verifying the diversity of rural livelihoods strategy
(Reardon, 1997), several issues have received attention; determinants
of diversification ( Smith, 2001), its distributional effects (
Ellis, 2000), favourable and unfavourable factors for diversification
(Hussein&Nelson, 1998) and its relationship with agricultural
productivity. ( Ellis, 2000).
Constraints
against and supports for diversification varies, and effects and
interplay between such factors are hard to generalize. What can be
observed is the local agricultural knowledege and skills tend to
deteriate and disappear for luck of specialization and
conservation. Overall, opinions over those issues are
divided, and patterns of diversification is context-specific.
Diversification can be either survival strategy or choice depending
on whether it is pursued out of involuntary reasons ( disasters,
conflicts) or opportunitiy ( better employment and business outside
farming). (Ellis, 2000) Distributional effects of diversification
also depends on whether the poor can diversify into other income
activities in more favourable terms (Reardon et al., 2000), which is
often a function of education and health.
While
a recent analysis acknowledges that one of important factors that
lead to economic progress is rural livelihood diversification, there
is a growing concern for rising inequality with diversification.
(Ellis, 2005) Thus, this dissertation will utilize and build on the
above analysis in order to identify patterns of diversification in
rural context and to search a way to promote
diversification in favour of the poor if it benefits them, if not to
explore the method to retain existing knowledege and to build new one
on them.
Securing
a variety of income sources in preparation for a failure in a certain
activity is a conventional wisdom reflected in the saying, ‘Don’t
put all your eggs in one basket.’ It is especially relavant in a
rural context where unpredictable weather patterns and harvest
performance make it difficult to secure a fixed amount of regular
income. Risk and seasonality comprise two classic reasons for
livelihood diversificaiton. In order to spread risks and secure a
constant inflow of income despite different harvesting seasons, rural
population has pursued various income activities with different risk
profiles. (Ellis, 2005)
While
livelihood diversification, as a risk stategy, reflects ever-present
uncertainties and risks, it is also a relfection of wider
opportunities available with economic advancement. (Losch et al.,
2010) As economic growth provides more employment and business
opportunities, people try to construct a composite of income
activities that maximize their income. Such different activities can
create a synergy effect for enhanced income. For example, income from
non-farm activities can be reinvested into agriculture, improving
soil quality through a fertilizer or purchaing a high-yield seed.
Rural
households’ choice for further diversification reflects changes in
surrounding environment and resulting opportunities and constraints.
Thus, there needs to be a better understanding of principal
motivations for diversification and constraints faced by rural
population in their efforts. Such observation and analysis will lead
to adequate policy measures to support efforts for diversification
and maximize its potential for income generation.
2)Disruption
of local agricultural knowledge
Given
the inherent uncertain and risky nature of agriculture, livelihood
diversification has long been practiced as a risky strategy. However,
the recent increasing reliance on diversification can be attributed
to fundamental changes in rural environment. In
particular, limitations of traditional farming to
generating sufficient income and increasing cash needs in cash-scarce
rural areas are the important causes. Berry argues that increased
off-farm activities reflect continuing agrarian crisis and economic
instability. (Berry, 1989) Ellis also argues that diversification is
a response to the failure of agriculture to provide sufficient
liveilhoods. (Ellis, 2005)
3)
Inadequcey of Agriculture
While
agriculture still remains as a major source of income, the
traditional farming alone increasingly fails to secure sufficient
income. Growth rate in the agricultural sector as a whole was only
0.4% in 2005/06 and production of food crops increased by only 0.3%.
(FAO, 2006) Sturcutral limitations of agriculture in terms of income
generation come from a number of facts including (a) declining farm
size, increasing rural population and customary
subdivision of land at inheritance lead to ever-declining farm sizes
for rural households. (b) deteriorating soil
quality:- deteriorating and exhausted soil make it difficult to
enhance productivity of even the small size of land available.
Liberalization of agriculture has increased prices of agricultural
inputs such as fertilizers beyond poor farmers’ ability to afford.
(Ellis, 2000) Farming techniques for better soil management have not
been widespread in rural areas with lack of extension services and
training opportunities. Crop yields are generally low as little
improved seed and virtually no fertilizers are used, resulting in
less competitiveness in the international market. (c) climate
change:- climate change makes it harder to predict weather
variations and thus to plant crops accordingly. Patterns of rainy and
dry seasons become unpredictable and crop failures are increasing.
Extension and advisory service and early warning system have not yet
reached many of rural areas. (d) unfavourable
farm-gate price. (Ellis, 2000) low farm-gate price that farmers
get for their crops adds to inability of farming to secure sufficient
livelihoods. Farmers only receive approximately 15 – 25 % of the
final retail price in cities and towns, as they are centers for
markets. (FAO, 2006) The “lack of economies of scale at
producer and retailer levels, marketing and transaction cost
inefficiencies in transport, processing, and post-harvest handling”
cause such problem. (FAO, 2006) Most of all, lack of bargaining power
of farmers because of poor organization and knowledge on price
enables middlemen to exploit a greater margin.
All
those factors may make rural dwellers seek alternative income
generation channel through livelihood diversification. This might
pave the way for gradual disappearance of agricultural
knowledge. Although, livelihood diversification into on-farm and
non-farm activities have benifitted some rural population in
general, as reflected in rising non-farm incomes and may led lessen
rural vulnerability to income shock to some of rural population,
close observation of its pattern raises some concerns over an unequal
access to diversification opportunities. There are variations in
types and profitability of diversification strategies among different
wealth, ethicicty (clan) poilitcal party affliation and gender group.
4)
Marginalization: when livelihood divesification is not enough
Although,
livelihood diversification into on-farm and non-farm activities have
benifitted some rural population in general, as reflected
in rising non-farm incomes and may led lessen rural vulnerability to
income shock to some of rural population, close observation of its
pattern raises some concerns over an unequal access to
diversification opportunities. There are variations in types and
profitability of diversification strategies among different wealth,
ethicicty (clan) poilitcal party affliation and gender group. A study
on Pakistan by Adams and He (Adams & He, 1995) is relevant. They
found that, when the non-farm activities are disaggregated into
unskilled labour, self-employment and government employment, only
those who access to power category decreased income inequality. Both
self-employment and government employment excluded the poor because
of high entry barriers. (Adams & He, 1995) Reardon et al.
(Reardon et al., 1998) also argued that non-farm activities
contribute to income inequality where there is a scarcity of
labour-intensive activities that have low entry barriers. Ellis
(Ellis 1999) adds to this that disparities widened with
diversification because the better off are able to diversify in more
advantageous labour markets than the poor. Barrett et al. refers to
such situation as a kind of “labour market duality”. (Barrett,
2001).
Meanwhile,
the average group is the most diversified, engaging in small
enterprise, cottage industries, fish trading and crop&livestock
sales& production. The average group engage in diverse activities
in an aspiration for asset acculmulation with an aim to pursue “more
singuraly profitable activity” in agriculture in the future. (Smith
et al., 2001) When
even the poor and the wealthy show a similar proportional degree of
diversification, the absolute level of non-farm income of those who
are backed by power full will be several times that of the poor.
(Ellis, 2001) Also, Deininger & Okidi found that household
endowment such as asset ownership is a potent factor in increasing
market integration, which means more access to business
opportunities. (Deninger & Okidi, 1999) Moreover, such uneven
trend can be reinforced with the liberalization pursued by the some
of the governments as privatized services
requiring payment are more accessible to those who are favoured by
politcal power hoders (Ellis et al., 2006), and politcally powerfull
in deciding in the policies of accesses.
Those
literature suggests that how marginalization and exclusion of
the poor has potential to use their human capital, which
might lead them to stress and mental struggle reflecting about their
status in their own land. Mental struggle to solve contradiction
whether to accept and internalise their vulnerabiility or resist and
how? This is an instance for lack of incentive to participate in
diversification that kills human capital of the poor and
marginalised, which may leads to uncertaininty,worry and livelihood
insecurity and failure or famine.
Therefore
the school of thought that links overpopulation to famine may have
not taken into consideration the human capital and capability
inherent in every individual as a person, on condition that this
person would have equal exposures and opportunities to capability
building mechanisms. Secondly they have a tendency to perceive human
agent as mere number devoid of human capabilities. In political
system, where fair distribution of opportunities to
enhance human capital and capabilities, population growth can be an
asset than liabilities. In a political system where unfair
distribution of opportunities in human capital building population
pressure can be liabilities than asset that leads to deterioration of
human capital asset, and livelihood disruption and insecurity leading
to living on the edge of famine and famine.
The
Sidama case
Most
of the Sidamas hold the perception of modern education as liberator
from the poverty and political marginalization. Therefore the
households may undertake significant investment in educating their
children. This investment entails, feeding, clothing,
school fees, the uniforms, school supplies, to achieve the purpose
intended, that is the responsibility of the household head or
household member. In accessing public schools, in primary and
secondary schooling there is no significant difference
between those who are integrated to SPDM on one hand, Those sceptic
neutrals and marginalized opposition members, sympathizers
and their relatives. However in post secondary post
secondary schooling for the latter two is extremely low in
Sidama. While those who are affiliated to SPDM and loosely
connected to their Sidama identity or Sidamaness are encouraged and
sponsored to join government and non-government educational
institutions particularly Civil service college without low or non
academic merits with guaranteed employment opportunities after
graduation. Those who are not affiliated to SPDM and
strongly connect themselves with their Sidama Identity are
marginalised in accessing post secondary schooling. Therefore In
order to fill this gap it is the responsibility of individual
households heads or members to do everything to educate and get
required skills for employment.
On
contrary to the inner reality, on the surface the EPRDF
government seemed to have extremely
strong drive to enhance access to pre secondary education,
after it has defeated the military regime in 1991, as reflected in
the number of people with primary school
education. However educational policy is producing more job seekers
than job creators.
Furthermore,
the current trend is worrying. Rampant and accumulated unemployment.
This has disestablising present, and uncertain future livelihood
security. Primarily,
disincentive of unemployment:- as
increasingly as children are being withdrawn
from secondary schools due
to rampant unemployment, and self employment opportunities in
the Sidama
also discouraged children
from completing basic four
years of primary education. It is common to hear young
children querying why they should keep on
going to school given that their brothers and sisters who completed
secondary and even tertiary education are unemployed .
Rather
than “waste” the time and the school, many decide to join exodus
to nearby towns as they have no slightest means even to migrate
neighbouring countries seeking jobs leaving the country for good.
Those
situations reflect how marginalization and excluding eligible work
force for simple reason of party membership and loyalty to the
regime, may create the mentality of hating the country to which one
is borne, for unseen dreams of “heaven “ in foreign land, which
may have effects of bleeding dry human capital and capability in the
country, and perpetuation of vulnerability to starvation and famine.
Thirdly,
On other hand, those who are not in position to migrate outside their
locality, envy on the SPDM cadres at the same time who hold
government employments and leadership position. This may lead to
implicit verbal offence to organised public protest and
confrontation. This might cause local authorities to feel insecure
and react irrationally. Worse
is the consequences of irrationalities as the hungry people sometimes
may politically “eat” their leaders.
Comments
Post a Comment