Intersection of FSN w/ Forests w/ Survival Needs
I would like to introduce another area for consideration, from the Sub-Saharan Africa/East Africa perspective. There is an intersection (postive) and tension (negative) between the forest/jungle and subsistence-level farming in remote areas of East Africa that must be taken into account in policy-making. This intersection includes not just food/nutrition survival, but also interfaces with broader policy issues of gender equality, child-soldiers, deforestation, and conflict resolution. I provide an overview, and then suggestions on policy implications below.
In much of remote East Africa, women and girls are the primary farmers, with farming a manual labor activity. Farm size is approx. 2 acres, farm productivity is approx 1 MT per acre => barely enough food to sustain the household. There is little or no incentive for local farmers to grow surplus food to sell because the storage facilities are bamboo & mud, the transportation is done via women's head or donkey-back, and the markets are barter. So even if there was capacity to grow surplus, the farmers do not because it would probably spoil rather than be sold.
The results of this food value chain are that 1) girls are kept out of school because they must labor in the field to feed the family. 2) young men and boys are excess mouths to feed. They are not viewed as productive members of the household, typically. 3) During the "hungry times", young men and boys are often (reluctantly) evicted from the family, and left to fend for themselves. 4) These young men/boys have the choice of starvation and being eaten by lions (which happens with regularity), or joining a local militia which provides them with food, shelter and protection from lions. The "creation" of child soldiers, in many rural subsistence areas of East Africa is frequently caused by this systemic problem of "who produces the food to feed the family" combined with "joining a militia is better than being eaten by lions or starving.
The tension between subsistence-rural farm householders and local wildlife is not limited to local predators such as lions. Troops of monkeys can strip a maize field of grain near harvest in a single night, far faster than birds can eat the grain. Elephants can flatten a field if the farmer happens to plant fields in the migratory paths. And so forth. Forests and "the bush" are frequently "hostile" environments for the smallholder, subsistence farmer in many areas of rural East Africa (aka "the bush").
On the other hand, without any other source of fuel or building materials, the forests also provide the basics for survival. Bamboo and large trees provide the basic building materials for houses, grain silos and community buildings. Special grass is encouraged to grow, providing water-proof thatch for roofs. Palm fronds make baskets, and vines make ropes. Wild fruit, nuts, and so forth provide sustenance. Deforestation would be a risk if the population density were higher, given that cooking is done using wood fires.
It is important that policy-makers understand both the benefits and challenges of the rural "Bush" smallholder/subsistence level farmer/village. As others have mentioned, the "Bush" provides nuts and other food supplies during the "hungry times". The Bush provides sometimes also provides protein. It provides building materials. It also provides danger and death from crop destruction or being eaten.
One way to improve the standard of living of these subsistence level farmers is to improve the post-harvest food value chain through investments in storage, transportation, and markets that reaches these more remote areas. Electrification through stand-alone solar installations would provide refrigeration and light, reducing the strain on forests for fuel supply and light. Who will pay for these improvements is a major policy question.
Infrastructure investment that especially addresses the post-harvest Food Value Chain (storage, transport, & markets) will require both visions, and private capital. Governments have historically been poor providers of the infrastructure to remote areas, whereas private capital has a better incentive for investment - i.e., to support the entire food value chain and move surplus goods to market.
In summary, the balance between Forestry and FSN, or Forestry and the Holistic Food Value Chain, will only be achieved in "The Bush" areas when the local population has the infrastructure to be more than simply surviving. Increase the demand for surplus food, improve the means to move the food through the supply chain to market, and you will increase the survivability of not just the individual farmer, but the entire rural population. Boys will not be evicted from the household to become lion meat or forced to join militias to live. Girls will be able to stay in school and become literate, and the balance between forests, wildlife, FSN, and survival will be better managed.
Dennis Bennett
CEO, AfriGains
US & East Africa
Dennis Bennett