15 pages, The novel Corona virus pandemic has been extremely overwhelming at all levels causing massive economic setbacks for many countries including South Africa. The country witnessed an unprecedented scaling-down of its national economic activities, which called for an emergency response from the government. Several Covid-19 relief schemes were instituted by the government to ensure that farms of all sizes would survive. A support fund of R1.2 billion was allocated to the agriculture and food sector through the Department of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development (DALRRD). The fund was primarily meant to assist financially distressed small-scale farmers to ensure continued production and food security for the country. This study collated the conditions for financial Covid-19 stimulus support required from smallholders and analysed several factors that prevented some members of this vulnerable group from benefitting from the relief funds. These factors include complexities associated with satisfactorily categorizing smallholder producers, productivity, marketing and policy challenges, glitches in formalising smallholder producer operations, the farm-business record keeping pitfall, and the exclusion of subsistent producers. The paper suggests some possible corrective measures that could allow for more inclusive support to these categories of farmers; some of which includes a simple but robust financial traceability system for the farmers, and a need to continue to push for the completion of national registration process of smallholder producers.
19 pages, Extension support is viewed as an enabler of food security. However, the literature reveals that extension within the public sector in South Africa is not yet geared to satisfy the needs of resource-poor smallholder producers to break away from poverty and food insecurity. This paper is aimed at reviewing budget allocation and public expenditure on agricultural extension support services to provide evidence-based recommendations to inform the implementation of the national policy on extension and advisory services. The study was conducted using budget allocation and expenditure data collected through a survey questionnaire directed at nine provincial departments of agriculture. The problem investigated was to establish whether the budget allocated to provincial extension services would be sufficient to implement the extension policy. Data analysis employed descriptive statistics including t-tests of differences in means. The study has delivered several findings: a). The budget execution rates were high for both the extension practitioners and the farmer programmes, with budget execution for farmer programmes being better than that for extension practitioners. b). The budget trends indicate an efficient system of budget execution for the benefit of the farmers. c). There were statistically significant differences between mean budget allocation for extension practitioners and farmer programmes. d). It was further found that the differences between the mean expenditure on extension practitioners and mean expenditure on farmer programmes were statistically significant. e). Consistent with budget allocation, mean expenditure on farmer programmes was higher than mean expenditure on extension practitioners leading to the conclusion that farmer programmes spent significantly higher than extension practitioners in the five financial years. f). On the other hand, it was found that the cost of implementing the newly developed national policy on extension and advisory services was found to be greater than the current budget allocation. The paper concluded that the budget allocation was insufficient, yet farmers received value for money.
