Foreword D
uring the 1980s, agricultural-sector reforms in many developing coun- tries led to the dismantling of rural producer organizations (RPOs)— farmers’ organizations, associations, and cooperatives. This was part of a larger process aimed at reducing the role of the state in the economy, eliminating inefficiencies in food production, and encouraging the growth of competitive markets in the agricultural sector. These reforms assumed that the private sector would replace the state as the key source of agricultural inputs and marketing services for smallholder farmers. While this has occurred in some countries with respect to cash crops, it is far less common in the case of staple foodcrops—crops that are critical to the livelihoods of the vast majority of smallholders in the developing world.
In recent years, RPOs have reappeared on the international development agenda as a potentially important means of linking farmers to markets, increas- ing agricultural productivity, and ultimately reducing rural poverty. Innova- tive RPO models are being held up as the key to helping smallholders better manage the procurement and distribution of inputs, aggregate their surplus farm output, and bargain for better terms of trade in the marketplace. These same models are also being leveraged to help government agencies and non- governmental organizations to better identify and reach out to the rural poor with an array of social and economic welfare programs. However, it is not clear how effective these RPO models may be, particu- larly for smallholders who cultivate food staples. What is missing is a suffi- cient body of evidence on where, when, and how RPOs benefit the rural poor— a significant gap in light of the checkered history of cooperatives in many countries. While evidence suggests that cooperatives play a constructive role when high-value agricultural commodities such as dairy and horticultural products are involved, there is far less evidence of their contribution to increasing returns to farmers who cultivate staple foods, particularly cere- als. This is because food staples are quite different from high-value crops in that they rarely offer the lucrative returns to farmers that high-value crops do. Staples are also more susceptible to distortions caused by urban-biased price-control policies and the competing price effects of food aid and food imports.
x
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103