10 pages, Prior to the year 1970, agriculture was the main source of livelihood and backbone of the Nigerian economy until the discovery of oil drastically decelerated its potential to sustainably maintain food security and generate significant export earnings. Despite its sudden fall in productivity, agriculture still remains the main sector providing the highest employment (70% of the population) for the populace. To tackle these problems, many policies were formulated (from 1960 to 2015) to resuscitate the sector but to no availdue to failure in tailoring suitable policies to engage small-scale farmers and address other socio-economic problems. This paper constitutes an in-depth review of agricultural production and food security in Nigeria with relative importance attributed to local food supply and small-scale farmers. The article analyzes several documents of the Nigerian Government and international organizations, such as the Food and Agricultural Organization, the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS), Department of Agriculture and Rural Development and a number of peer-reviewed journals across various disciplines to provide a balanced interdisciplinary review. The paper concludes that food insecurity is at its peak in Nigeria and urgent attention is required in the agricultural sector to compensate for the unstable food balance in the country. There is a need for the Government to take strong measures against the food deficit situation and to support the development of the primary agriculture sector. The paper proposes viable policies that could involve smallholders, aid transformation and positively restructure the agricultural sector.
Specht, Kathrin (author), Zoll, Felix (author), Schumann, Henrike (author), Bela, Julia (author), Kachel, Julia (author), and Robischon, Marcel (author)
Format:
Journal article
Publication Date:
2019
Published:
International
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 99 Document Number: D10870
Via online. 27 pages., Global challenges such as climate change, increasing urbanization and a lack of transparency of food chains, have led to the development of innovative urban food production approaches, such as rooftop greenhouses, vertical farms, indoor farms, aquaponics as well as production sites for edible insects or micro-algae. Those approaches are still at an early stage of development and partly unknown among the public. The aim of our study was to identify the perception of sustainability, social acceptability and ethical aspects of these new approaches and products in urban food production. We conducted 19 qualitative expert interviews and applied qualitative content analysis. Our results revealed that major perceived benefits are educational effects, revaluation of city districts, efficient resource use, exploitation of new protein sources or strengthening of local economies. Major perceived conflicts concern negative side-effects, legal constraints or high investment costs. The extracted acceptance factors deal significantly with the “unknown”. A lack of understanding of the new approaches, uncertainty about their benefits, concerns about health risks, a lack of familiarity with the food products, and ethical doubts about animal welfare represent possible barriers. We conclude that adaptation of the unsuitable regulatory framework, which discourages investors, is an important first step to foster dissemination of the urban food production approaches.
18 pages, The donation of unharvested or unsold crops to rescue organizations has been promoted as a strategy to improve healthy food access for food insecure households while reducing production-level food loss and waste (FLW). In this study, we aimed to assess the motivations, barriers, and facilitators for crop donation as a FLW reduction strategy among Maryland farmers. We interviewed 18 Maryland-based food producers (nine frequent crop donors and nine infrequent, by self-report) in 2016 – 2017, soliciting their perspectives on crop donation motivators, process feasibility, and interventions aimed at increasing crop donation. The interviews were thematically coded. All respondents were aware of crop donation as an option, and most expressed interest in reducing FLW by diverting crop surpluses for human consumption. While financial barriers represented one aspect influencing donation decisions, respondents also cited convenience, process knowledge, and liability as key considerations. In contrast to frequent donors, many of whom considered donation a moral imperative, some infrequent donors questioned the expectation that they would donate crops without compensation. Both frequent and infrequent donors were aware of pro-donation tax incentives, and infrequent donors reported being unlikely to use them. This research demonstrates that crop donation motivations, barriers, and facilitators can be diverse. Given the existence of crop surpluses and their potential benefits as emergency food, our results suggest that multiple interventions and policies may contribute to incentivizing and facilitating crop donation (or enabling the purchase of surplus crops) rather than one-size-fits-all approaches. Our findings also highlight a need to prioritize crop recovery methods that enhance growers’ financial stability.
