THE POVERTY, FOOD & AGRICULTURESECURITY and TECHNOLOGY NEXUS in NIGERIAN DEVELOPMENT

THE POVERTY, FOOD & AGRICULTURESECURITY and TECHNOLOGY NEXUS IN NIGERIAN DEVELOPMENT

Engr. Professor P.O. Ngoddy, FAS, FIAFoST, FAEng

University of Nigeria, Nsukka

INTRODUCTION

Chairman, Nigeria’s problem of contemporary problems on which I decided to put the search light of this lecture is one that touches all of us here today. That problem is poverty.

According to the World Development Report (World Bank, 2003), more than 80% of all of us here today in this hall live below the poverty line since I will like to think of us (those who are here) as being typically average Nigerians despite our level of education. Yes even in spite of our high technological training. The 80% who are poor are a burden to us. By the Pareto principle, we are also a serious burden to the 20% who are rich because how we live our lives and what we do affect their own quality of life in many significant ways. Therefore, even the privileged few that are rich cannot ignore the masses that are poor for the simple reason that as President John F. Kennedy aptly put it in his inaugural address (1960), pervasive poverty renders the wealth of the few who are rich perpetually insecure.

Whether we like it or not and whether we recognize it or not, poverty is the most pressing challenge of Nigeria as a nation today. Poverty is the most tangible barometer for assessing if development is progressing or not. If we apply poverty as a fundamental yardstick, then the verdict cannot be in doubt as regards the fate of the development project of post-independence Nigeria. If we use poverty as a measure, then without any shadow of doubt, Nigeria has retrogressed and is getting worse since independence. It should be self-evident that addressing the challenge of Nigerian poverty is the most urgent single problem facing us as a people. Solving Nigeria’s poverty challenge is a task we must all embrace with every fiber of strength we possess.

This paper starts from the fundamental premise [a heresy in Nigeria’s conventional wisdom!] that historically, no country or people have ever been able to address their poverty problem successfully without technology. Nigeria cannot be an exception [another heresy in Nigeria’s conventional wisdom!]. Therefore, the answer to our nation’s spiraling problem of poverty lies in exploring how to untie that Gordian knot which I have chosen to call the Poverty, Food&Agricultural Security and Technology Nexus. The paper is presented in 5-parts:

Part I:Introduction summarizes the motivation for the paper and outlines its scope.

Part II:Examines the nature of Nigerian poverty, its causes and explores the machinery for combating it.

Part III:Examines how the instruments of Food and Agricultural Security can be maximally harnessed to address the poverty problem.

Part IV:Examines the role of Science, Engineering and Technology (SET) in national development using an overview case history of countries which having successfully navigated the turbulent seas of underdevelopment, hunger and poverty using the instruments of SET, have berthed safely on the shores of national wealth and prosperity.

Part V:Sums up the various strands of thought expressed in the paper drawing conclusions that converge to a central message.

II.POVERTY, ITS CAUSES AND HOW TO COMBAT IT

2.1The Depth of Nigerian Poverty

On the surface, poverty is the absence of purchasing power. The Earth Summit (UNCED, 1992) in its famous document Agenda-21, defined poverty as coterminous with persons trying to survive on less than $1.00 (US) per day. According to the report of Nigerian Vision-2010 Committee (1997), Nigeria has an estimated per capita GDP of less than $300.00 (US). Therefore the average citizen is, by definition, below the Agenda-21 poverty-line. This shocking revelation tells us a number of very painful things, namely:

The state of Nigerian poverty is worse than the world-average estimate of 40-percent of people worldwide living below the poverty-line;

Nigeria’s poverty status is worse than the sub-Sahara African (SSA) average of 45-percent of citizens living below the poverty line;

Up to year-2000, figures as high as 60 to 80-percent have been reported for Nigeria (World Bank/UNDP, 2000) as the proportion of our citizenry who live below the poverty-line;

This rather sobering reality is a sad reflection of how badly we have mismanaged our vast reserves of oil and other resources in Nigeria since our independence in 1960.

2.2The Causes of Nigerian Poverty

Figure-1 represents is an attempt to profile at a glance, three causative factors of poverty, namely: it’s basic (or root) causes, it’s underlying causes and it’s immediate causes. The immediate causes of poverty are unemployment and under-employment. It is the resulting absence of personal income at the critical threshold-level from which poverty becomes manifest. The underlying causes of unemployment derive from and manifest in communities which are unable to create a dynamic culture of appropriate indigenous technologies that empower their citizens to link resources, their ownership and usage patterns with domestic demand driven by the basic needs of society in order to generate production. The root or basic causes of poverty derive from the degree of dys-functionality of the socio-econo-political superstructure of the society (its so-called political economy) which governs the composition and structure of national wealth and controls its distribution.

From this brief analysis, we affirm a truism to the effect that poverty is only a manifestation or symptom of a fundamental malady. Poverty is not the disease. It is not the problem.

2.3Nigerian Poverty as a Chronic not Transitory Phenomenon

Because of the pervasive, long-term and deteriorating character of poverty in Nigeria, it should be clear despite our enormous oil and other resources that poverty has assumed a systemic dimension in the country.

Unfortunately, rather than recognize it for the chronic phenomenon it is, successive governments in Nigeria have tended to address the nation’s poverty challenges with patently transitory programmes of intervention often heralded by intense sloganeering much of which vanishes with the government which established them (examples: OFN, Green Revolution, Better Life Programme, FSP, FEAP and NALDA). The few which survive, tend to do so in a degree of diminutive vigour that renders them ineffective (examples: NDE, ADPs, RBDAs, DFRRI, NACB). What Nigeria needs to combat the chronic syndrome of poverty are bold, robust and permanent economic and political structures for integrated rural and urban development to which successive governments must give unstinting commitment through responsible, long-tern fiscal and budgetary policies that must be executed with honesty, probity and the highest quality of professionalism. It is correct to say of past efforts to alleviate poverty in Nigeria that they proved to be lacking in continuity and accountability. Most of them were grossly under-funded and became elastic conduits to funnel huge sums of public money into the pockets of corrupt officers and their cohorts.

President Obasanjo’s National Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy (NEEDS: 2004) is an eloquent acknowledgement of the failure of past attempts of successive governments to arrest poverty in Nigeria. The entire economic programme of the Obasanjo administration, as portrayed by NEEDS and SEEDS documents was conceived as a grand antipoverty strategy. Specific antipoverty initiatives which can be identified include but are by no means limited to the following:

NAPEP (National Poverty Eradication Programme);
SMEDAN (Small and Medium-scale Enterprises Development Agency of Nigeria);
SMIEIS (Small and Medium-scale Industries Equity Investment Scheme);
BOI (Bank of Industries);
NACRDB (The Nigerian Agric Cooperative and Rural Bank).
Cassava for Export Programme;
Palm Expansion Programme;
Rice Self-sufficiency Programme;
National Micro Finance Framework for Nigeria under development by CBN; and
NEPAD (New Economic Programme for African Development).

Despite these efforts, the depth of Nigerian poverty has continued to grow on all fronts as if these efforts were mere catalysts actively working to stimulate the cancerous cells of poverty into even more vicious action of devastation.

Ample evidence of the monstrous growth of poverty is everywhere as unemployment has continued to grow by leaps-and-bounds. With steadily rising cost of food and livelihood in the country, more people are moving systematically below the poverty line by the day. These developments provide more than sufficient proof of the fact that much more than is currently being done is both necessary and urgent to stem the overpowering tide of burgeoning poverty in Nigeria.

2.4How to Combat Poverty on a Massive and Sustainable Basis

Production provides employment and income which empowers individuals with purchasing power. The purchasing of goods and services (produced) generates profits, which in turn, provide the incentive that justifies investment in further production and employment.

In a free society, democracy nurtures free enterprise structures, which provide the enabling economic and political environment that, in turn, nurtures entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship drives the economic system consisting of people, resources, technology and markets to generate growth. In the 21st century, Small and Medium-Scale Enterprises (SMEs) are the engine of Entrepreneurship.

What this brief analysis tells us is that creating SMEs in the hundreds-of-thousands (even millions) and growing them constitute the most potent weapon to create productive employment, combat poverty and sustain that frenetic process on the long-term.

2.5What are SMEs?

We define an SME as an enterprise that employs less than 100-workers and is financed with a modest financial outlay. If we assume an average workforce of 20-employees per enterprise for purposes of analysis, then every 100,000 SMEs can potentially create 2-million productive jobs. If Nigeria has 25-million unemployed but able-bodied citizens who desire to work, then the nation will require 1-million SMEs to create enough workplaces for every job seeker. At an estimated investment capital ratio index of $5,000 (US) per workplace as recommended by UNIDO (1979) for SMEs in developing economies, we can estimate aggregate investment capital per enterprise at roughly $100,000 (US). This means that $100-billion (US) (or ₦15-trillion) shall be required to create this monumental number of jobs all at once. It is neither desirable nor possible to create all 25-million jobs at once. It is more realistic to phase the development programme for SMEs over say 10-years at 100,000 enterprises (or 2-million jobs) per year. This is no mean task. It will require $10-billion (US) per year (or ₦1.5-trillion/ year).

There are many advantages to be gained by phasing SME development over 10-years. It makes it possible to engineer self-sustainability into the process. That process allows for a gestation period of say two or three years following which the establishment of new SMEs can be financed from returns accruing from earlier investments. An internal rate of return of 10-percent for the aggregated investment is not far-fetched if executed with the expected spirit of professionalism and probity. In particular, this level of return would seem realistic from World Bank and IMF practices. It is necessary that we nurture a culture of learning-by-doing in the process.

Once again the above figures serve to underscore the character and magnitude of the national challenge of combating poverty. Trying to create 200,000-jobs over 5-years as NAPEP tried to do just does not address the scope of the problem at hand. To create 25-million jobs in 10years is a breath-taking undertaking. But to aim for less is suicidal because it is the democratic right of every citizen to be provided with the opportunity to work productively for our country. The country needs the work (intellectual and physical) as much as the individual needs it to provide for his/her basic needs for employment and income.

Clearly, no one single organization in Nigeria has the capacity to cope with or to manage the level of complexity implicit in creating and sustaining the establishment of 100,000 SMEs per year. Nigerians have never been famous for our ability to manage complexity, quite the contrary. Therefore, we must aim for a diversified organizational framework to address the challenges that will arise across our 36-states + 1 (the FCT) and across nearly 800-LGAs (or is it now a couple of thousands?). In this enterprise, we must eschew concentration as we create SMEs in the hundreds (and thousands) to operate in the primary economic and social sectors (or theatres) of national life including agribusiness, industry, mining, power and energy, finance-and-trade, infrastructure, ICT, social services, etc.

2.6A fundamental Conditionality for the Successful Creation of Thousands of SMEs as an Effective Anti-poverty Strategy.

Because too many Nigerian citizens are dying to find productive employment, no single machinery for employment-creation will be adequate.

To be successful, any machinery we envisage for sustainably creating SMEs in the large numbers necessary must, in the words of the famous Chinese proverb, learn: “to walk on two (infact multiple) legs” .

What this means is that to gain precious time and to create the elbow-room necessary to nurture a national machinery for the creation of SMEs in large numbers, we must simultaneously create other complementary but necessarily different machineries to provide an effective and even strategic safety-net or buffer-mechanism for the massive employment and conditioning of otherwise wasting (and restive) youths for eventual absorption into SMEs as they develop by a gradual process of evolution.

Let us for the sake of argument call one such complementary mechanism, EBA (Employment Buffer Agency/Authority/ Administration). EBA shall be established in every State and every LGA to superintend over the process of engaging private construction companies (SMEs) using direct labour as a mandatory requirement for the execution of public work projects involving roads and other infrastructural developments. The Marwa Administration of Lagos State amply demonstrated the fundamental efficacy of this mechanism. Under that scheme, the Lagos state government embarked on large-scale rehabilitation of public infrastructure through a system of negotiated agreements with private SMEs which were awarded contracts on 3-conditions, namely:

Engage and train (i.e. impart work discipline in) unemployed youths (aka: “area boys”) as direct labour on the projects;

Government pays for and supplies bulk-purchase materials of construction and pays the wages of direct labour; and

The executing SME receives payment for overhead-charges with an in-built profit margin negotiated in advance.

We can borrow a leaf from that eventful experience to foster and strengthen the accelerated development of the SME sector of our industrial economy. As an umbrella mechanism, the strategy-goals of EBA shall be two-fold, namely:

To train and motivate large numbers of unskilled and semi-skilled labour (youths) destined for eventful absorption into SMEs as they evolve on the practical aspects of workplace culture ;
To maintain and open up roads, waterways, water-supply schemes, urban and rural power supply schemes, health centres, schools, industrial-estates, farming estates etc., required as essential infrastructure for the successful development of SMEs in the large numbers anticipated.

2.7The Ten Commandments for Growing Agribusiness SMEs

With a rural population of 70% it is assumed that at least 70% of all SMEs being advocated would be in the Agribusiness sector. How do we grow these?

(1)Make agriculture the No. 1 developmental priority of Nigeria. Allocate at least 25-percent of annual budget to Agriculture for 25-continuous years, uninterrupted.

(2)Put in place a new pentagonal model of agricultural development that is holistic.

(3)Agribusiness-SMEs are the modern engines for rapid agricultural development. Create a conducive environment for these engines to germinate and thrive.

(4)Nigerian tertiary education must grow SME-entrepreneurs for the agricultural sector.

(5)Nigerian Financial Institutions must cultivate the specialized and delicate skills required to grow enterprises in the agricultural sector.

(6)Create Business-friendly Environments for Agribusiness-SMEs to thrive and become effective economic agents.

(7)Invest heavily in capacity-building to enable Agribusiness-SMEs to overcome their traditional weaknesses.

(8)Expand access to capital markets for agriculture. Expand them and continue to do so ad-infinitum.

(9)Introduce subcontracting and widen conventional and novel market-linkages that open up business opportunities and markets for agribusiness-SMEs.

(10)Empower Agribusiness-SMEs; empower them; and empower them a million times and never stop.

III.HARNESSING NATIONAL FOOD AND AGRICULTURAL SECURITY AS A TOOL FOR POVERTY ERADICATION

3.1What is National Food Security?

Food security is defined as the ability of a country/region/state/family to ensure on a long-term basis that its food systems provide the total population access to timely, reliable and nutritionally adequate supply of food.

The Five-Cornerstones of National Food Security are:

Efficient and expanding growth of food and agricultural production;
Employment and income-generating opportunities to enable the rural and urban poor to purchase an adequate or improved diet;
Access to food to ensure that the entire population can satisfy threshold or subsistence food requirements i.e. availability and affordability;
Adequate food surpluses in reserves, and/or reliable trading agreements for protection against bad harvests, national disasters, uncertain world food supplies and food-price stabilization; and
Population control and management strategies.

National Food Security occurs when the 5-cornerstones are in place and functioning interactively as shown in Fig. -2. Food Insecurity occurs when any one or more of these cornerstones are absent or dysfunctional.

There are two types of Food Insecurity:

Chronic or Systemic Food Insecurity which is long-term and results from bad micro and macro-economic policies of bad governments sustained over decades of national life such as Nigeria has experienced since independence; and
Transitory Food Insecurity resulting from emergency situations such as climatic and other forms of disorder which are short- term and can be addressed by measures such as food subsidy and work-for-food programs.