Rural poverty and poverty alleviation in Mozambique - SOAS

38 Pages·1998·0.27 MB·English

TheJournalofModernAfricanStudies,36,1(1998),pp.101–138
PrintedintheUnitedKingdom #1998CambridgeUniversityPress
Rural poverty and poverty
alleviation in Mozambique: what’s
missing from the debate?
Christopher Cramer and Nicola Pontara*
i. introduction
ThepeaceaccordsignedinOctober1992andmultipartyelectionsheld
in October 1994 brought to Mozambique fresh hopes and oppor-
tunities. Post-war reconstruction has been underway for some years,
through an array of projects ranging from hand-outs for demobilised
soldiers to the World Bank supported Roads and Coastal Shipping
(ROCS) rehabilitation project running from 1994 to 2000. Although
there is political tension between the two main parties and former
contestants in the civil war, Frelimo and Renamo, and a combination
of rising urban crime and sporadic banditry on roads in rural areas,
generallytherehasbeenastrongimprovementinpoliticalstabilityand
physicalsecurityforthemajorityofthepopulation.Economicreforms,
broadly typical of World Bank(cid:125)IMF stabilisation and structural
adjustment programmes, have accelerated during the 1990s and have
been underwritten by substantial external financial support. The end
of war together with deregulating policy reforms and a sweeping
privatisation programme have provoked a surge in foreign investor
interestinthecountry.Inaggregatetermsandinspiteofdatacaveats,
the evidence suggests that Mozambique has become one of the fastest
growing economies in Sub-Saharan Africa during the 1990s.
Yet the country continues to be troubled by widespread extreme
poverty,particularlyinruralareas.Oftheestimated80percentofthe
population that is rurally based, ‘two thirds are deemed to be
(cid:34)
absolutelypoor’. Thechallengeofruralpovertyreductionasapolicy
priority has provoked an increase in work on the characteristics of the
ruralpoorandonthepolicyimplications.Theliteraturehasattempted
* SchoolofOrientalandAfricanStudies.Theauthorsaregratefulforaresearchgrantmade
to Dr Cramer by the SOAS research committee, that made the case study possible; and for
commentsbyJohnSenderandHenryBernstein.
(cid:34) Government ofMozambique [GOM], Policy FrameworkPaperfor (cid:129)(cid:137)(cid:137)(cid:134)–(cid:137)(cid:136),preparedby the
Mozambican authorities in collaboration with the Staffs of the IMF and the World Bank,
(Maputo,Mozambique,1996).
102 christopher cramer and nicola pontara
to conceptualise an appropriate rural development strategy and has
also sought to fill in some of the gaps left by the extremely unreliable
(cid:35)
data on virtually every aspect of the Mozambican economy. The
urgency of poverty-reducing policies is recognised explicitly by the
(cid:36)
government. The Ministry of Agriculture (MOA) has set up a Food
SecurityProject(FSP)andhasconductedresearchonthesmallholder
sector in association with Michigan State University (MSU) since
1992.ThePovertyAlleviationUnit(PAU),setupwithintheMinistry
of Planning and Finance, has also produced reports on poverty and
poverty reduction strategies. Among the other sources of interest in
poverty-related issues in Mozambique is the Land Tenure Centre
(LTC), based in the University of Madison–Wisconsin.
Official policy statements, which also reflect the view of the
Washington-based international financial institutions, lay down the
medium and long-term economic goal of creating conditions for
(cid:37)
poverty-reducing economic growth. This appears rather less am-
bitious,giventhatonemayassumelagsbetweencreatingconditionsfor
poverty-reducing growth and growth itself, and lags between growth
andpovertyreduction;thoughclearlythelengthoflagsdependsonthe
precise growth policies adopted. The official position is that com-
mitment to smallholder farmers, in the form of market integration
measures and secure tenure conditions, will provide both economic
growth and the mechanism whereby this growth will be poverty
reducing.
This article highlights the main propositions put forward in the
recent literature and argues that there are significant dimensions of
ruralpovertyinMozambiquethathavebeenneglected,withimportant
policy implications. There are differences within the literature, for
example in terms of attitudes to the ro(cid:35)le of large-scale commercial
agricultural enterprises. However, it will be argued that the main
strandsoftheliteraturesharesomecommonassumptionsregardingthe
characteristics of the rural poor and the policies required to eradicate
poverty. Fundamentally, the majority of contributions to the debate
agree on the policy primacy of the smallholder farmer with secure
access to his or her own plot of land. The World Bank, and those
(cid:35) GOM, Policy Framework, p.18; Finn Tarp and Morten Igel Lau, ‘Mozambique:
macroeconomicperformanceandcriticaldevelopmentissues’,paperpresentedtothe16thArne
Ryde Symposium on Post-Apartheid Southern Africa, Lund University, 23–24 Aug. 1996;
EconomistIntelligenceUnit,Mozambique(cid:129)(cid:137)(cid:137)(cid:134)–(cid:137)(cid:135)CountryProfile(London,1997),13.
(cid:36) GOM, The Policy Reduction Strategies for Mozambique, Ministry of Planning and Finance,
PovertyAlleviationUnit,April1996. (cid:37) GOM,PolicyFramework,p.4.
rural poverty in mozambique 103
reportswhichtheBankhasinfluencedinvariousways,tendtobefairly
sanguine about the ease of finding a solution to the problem of
contested conditions of land access and about the ease of generating
substantial income and nutritional improvements among smallholders
and the rural poor. Others consider land access to be a source of
political competition, and point to the incoherence resulting from the
(cid:38)
disintegrationofFrelimo’sruralstatefarmstrategies. Nevertheless,for
most contributors to the literature, the access of rural households to
cultivable land is considered the critical factor in the survival of the
rural poor.
Responding to data suggesting that land holdings are positively
associated with caloric intake and income, some have dramatised the
(cid:39)
significanceoflandaccesstoruralsurvival. AccordingtothePAU,the
most effective way to end poverty is to stabilise the population in the
countryside and improve conditions there within a framework of
prioritisingsmallholderagriculture,supporting this sector for example
(cid:40)
withinputprovisionpackages. LTCresearchershavestressedtheneed
to promote so-called indigenous capitalist development as a defence
against ‘external’ interests: the emphasis is on control of the land by
smallholders, who are defined chiefly in opposition to larger private
commercial enterprises and joint ventures between these and the
(cid:41)
government. These researchers, together with other commentators,
callforathoroughgoingrevisionofexistinglandlaws,arguingthatthe
ongoing consultative process of constructing new land legislation does
not go far enough to assure land access for smallholders. Most of this
literature is informed by an archetype of the African peasant
smallholder, conceived as a stable family which produces on a small
scale,virtuallyentirelyfromthelabourinputsoffamily members, and
whichconsumesasignificantproportionofownfarmoutput,havingno
(cid:42)
access to other sources of consumption.
(cid:38) SeeGregoryW.MyersandHarryG.West‘Apieceoflandinalandofpeace?Statefarm
divestiture in Mozambique’, Journal of Modern African Studies 34, 1 (1996). See also Bridget
O’Laughlin, ‘Through a divided glass: dualism, class and the agrarian question in
Mozambique’,JournalofPeasantStudies23,4(1996);and‘Pastandpresentoptions:landreform
inMozambique’,ReviewofAfricanPoliticalEconomy63(1995).
(cid:39) GOM,Padro(cid:104)esdedistribuiça(cid:104)odaterranosectorfamiliaremMoçambique:asimilaridadeentreduas
pesquisasdistintaseasimplicaço(cid:104)esparaadefiniça(cid:104)odepolı(cid:85)ticas,MinistryofAgriculture(cid:125)MichiganState
University, Relato(cid:33)rio Preliminar, 1994; DavidL.Tschirley and MichaelT.Weber, ‘Food
securitystrategiesunderextremelyadverseconditions:thedeterminantsofhouseholdincomeand
consumptioninruralMozambique’,WorldDevelopment22,2(1994)159.
(cid:40) GOM,PolicyReductionStrategies.
(cid:41) See, for instance, Joseph Hanlon, Peace Without Profit: How the IMF blocks rebuilding in
Mozambique(Heineman,1996).
(cid:42) See,forexample,GOM,PolicyReductionStrategies,p.7.
104 christopher cramer and nicola pontara
Thisarticlehastwoprincipalobjectives.First,weshallcriticisewhat
we argue to be an overemphasis on the prioritisation of smallholder
agricultural development. In particular, we take issue with the
characterisation of the rural poor in Mozambique in terms of the
isolation and lack of differentiation of the peasantry. We also argue
that, partly as a result of this neglect of change and differentiation,
there is in much of the existing literature a gross oversimplification of
therelationsbetweenthepeasantryandlargecommercialand‘outside’
agricultural interests. For most recent literature ignores the fact that
differentiation processes were well underway at independence, and
(cid:34)(cid:33)
that ‘proletarianisation was a deeply rooted process’. Furthermore,
there is reason to suggest that these processes were not halted or
reversedduringwartime.Norisitobviousthatlargefarmsownedfully
or in part by overseas capital necessarily undermine the interests of
poverty reduction.
Second, we shall underline the potential significance of two factors
whose role and implications are neglected in the literature: i.e. the
importanceof farm wage labour income for the survival of the poorest
Mozambicans (especially female-headed or female-dominated house-
holds), and the extent to which rural–rural labour migration may be
stimulated by the availability of wage employment opportunities on
farms. These issues have received little or no attention in the studies
surveyedhere.However,recentdevelopmentsintheagrariansectorin
Mozambiquesuggestthattherecouldbeasubstantialincreaseinwage
labour opportunities, both permanent and seasonal. Some 40 million
hectares have been allocated by the government to joint venture
(cid:34)(cid:34)
companies and large private commercial enterprises. It will be
arguedthatafailuretopaysufficientanalyticalandpolicyattentionto
rural wage employment and rural–rural migration could have severe
consequencesforthemostvulnerablesegmentsofMozambicansociety,
especiallythosewithleastchanceofreproducingtheirfamilieswithout
access to off-farm labour income. A failure to focus on this issue,
moreover, diverts attention away from determinants of the living
standardsofpoorruralpeople,suchasthewagelevelincommercialised
agriculture and working conditions on farms using hired labour.
Evidencepointstoahighdegreeofpopulationmobilitywithinrural
areas in Mozambique. The end of the civil war has opened up the
potential for refugees in neighbouring countries and the internally
displaced (deslocados) to return to their homes and fields, and for those
(cid:34)(cid:33) O’Laughlin,‘Dividedglass’,p.6. (cid:34)(cid:34) MyersandWest,‘Pieceofland’.
rural poverty in mozambique 105
forcefully shunted into Frelimo’s communal villages also to return to
originalsmallfarmsandcasheworchards.Italsoeasesthepotentialto
move away from small farms in search of wage opportunities. To the
extent that the current literature on rural Mozambique acknowledges
theexistenceandpotentialforruralmigrationatall,itsemphasisison
the negative effects this might have. But we argue that there may also
be positive or ‘spread’ effects on the well-being of rural people . In
short, the combination of rural social differentiation, existing and
potential wage labour opportunities in agriculture, and a history and
potentialforlabourmigrationwithinruralareas,pointstoaconception
of the possibilities contained in the prevailing reality of the rural
Mozambicaneconomythat is ratherdifferentfromthestandard view.
For illustrative purposes, this article makes use of a small case study
conducted at low cost for exploratory purposes in the district of
Chokwe in December 1996(cid:125)January 1997. The aim of the case study
was to gather data chiefly on female seasonal labourers on the cotton
fieldsof theLonrho Mozambique AgriculturalCompany(Lomaco), a
joint venture between Lonrho and the Mozambican government.
Specifically, we seek to make a preliminary assessment of the
significance of wage labour income for the survival of female-headed
households. Such households supply a considerable proportion of the
seasonal labour employed by Lomaco in Chokwe.
The article is organised as follows. Section ii briefly surveys the
propositions contained in the main body of the recent literature on
rural poverty in Mozambique concerning the incidence and charac-
teristics of rural poverty and the issues of land access and use. Section
iii presents the case study carried out in Chokwe, discussing the
questionnaire used,thesample frame and theresults. Sectioniv draws
on a broader literature on social and economic relations in rural
Mozambique to develop the argument for a reassessment of the
characteristicsoftheruralpoor.Thissectionwillsuggestthatthereare
significantdynamicfeaturesofruralMozambiquethatrequiregreater
attention than they are paid in recent literature. A concluding section
draws together the main points made and will suggest the most
important research and policy implications.
ii. dominant themes in the literature on rural
poverty in mozambique
Assessing the extent and range of characteristics of poverty in rural
Mozambiqueisverymuchanongoingproject.Thankstothelongwar
106 christopher cramer and nicola pontara
and the weakness of statistical services, data coverage is particularly
poorinMozambique,beyond theusual degreeof unreliability of Sub-
Saharan African statistics. However, during the mid-1990s there have
been a number of attempts, official and independent, to improve the
coverageinordertoprovideabasisforpovertyassessmentsandpolicy
recommendations. This section highlights the main themes of the
literature, focusing particularly on works such as the PAU’s Rural
Poverty Profile and its Poverty Reduction Strategy, the papers of the
MOA(cid:125)MSU, and work by Myers and West and by Tshirley and
Weber.
The poverty alleviation unit (PAU)
The two key documents of the PAU, as of early 1997, are the Poverty
ReductionStrategyforMozambique(PRS), publishedinMarch1995, and
Mozambique: Rural Poverty Profile (RPP), published in April 1996. The
RPPstatesthatpovertyistobedefined‘insuchawaythatitcanhelp
the formulation of specific policies and programmes for population
(cid:34)(cid:35)
groups considered to be poor’ (RPP, ii). The same document makes
itclear that thework doneprovidesa ‘snapshot’,whichmaybe taken
tosuggest that it doesnot fullytake account of underlyingprocesses of
change.
The RPP acknowledges the paucity of poverty data. In particular,
there are no reliable data on income and consumption. But the profile
does draw on a number of surveys done before 1996, such as the 1995
Multiple Indicators Survey, the National Demographic Survey of
1991, and a 1995 Centre for Population Studies (Eduardo Mondlane
University)participatorysurvey.Itisanticipatedthatastrongerbasis
for poverty assessment is to be provided by the National Household
Survey,dueforcompletionduring1997.So,itisclearlystatedthatthe
RPP is preliminary and indicative.
The main features of rural Mozambican poverty as highlighted in
this profile can be summarised as follows: the poor live in extremely
isolated and self-contained households with little access to productive
(cid:34)(cid:35) GOM,ii.Itisslightlydisconcertingthatthisstatementcanbereadanotherway,giventhat
thisdocumentwaswrittenafterthePRS,thathadalreadysetoutthedesiredpovertyreduction
policies.Hence,itispossibletosuspectthatthedefinitionandconceptualisationofpovertyinthe
RPP were constructed to support a pre-determined set of policy priorities and that there are
shortcomingsintheapproachtakentoassessingpovertyanditscharacteristics.Insofarasthis
isevidenceofoverlydeductivistreasoning,onemaynotethedominationofmainstreameconomic
thoughtbydeductivistmethodologyandthat‘freereinhasbeengiventodeductiviststodevelop
theory according to an internal agenda’ (Sheila Dow, ‘Critical survey: mainstream economic
methodology’,CambridgeJournalofEconomics21(1997),75).
rural poverty in mozambique 107
Table 1
Basic social indicators for Mozambique
Least
Sub-Saharan developed
Mozambique Africa countries
Lifeexpectancy(years) 47 52 51
Mortalityrate(per1,000livebirths) 150 103 114
Under-fivemortalityrate(per1,000livebirths) 273 165 –
Maternalmortalityrate(per100,000livebirths) 1,100 690 740
Adultliteracyrate(%) 33 47 45
Dailycaloriesupply(%requirement) 77 93 90
Source: Poverty Alleviation Unit, The Poverty Reduction Strategy for Mozambique (Ministry of
PlanningandFinance,1995).
inputsandlittleincentivetoincreaseproduction;mostofthepoorlive
on small land holdings with insecure property rights; in spite of some
evidence of differentiation and apart from regional differences, it is
possible to characterise the poor as members of a fairly homogeneous
peasantry; the most disadvantaged Mozambicans are women, es-
pecially those in female headed households; and problems of poverty
have been exacerbated by out-migration, typically of males, leaving
high dependency ratios.
Thus, a ‘very high proportion of rural households in Mozambique
are subsistence oriented in the organisation of their economic
activities…and they can be described as relatively economically,
(cid:34)(cid:36)
socially and physically isolated’. This isolation fosters self-sufficiency
strategies, as opposed to the trade-related exploitation of comparative
(cid:34)(cid:37)
advantage based on differences in terrain and soil fertility. Because
this inward-turned reproductive strategy is biased towards low-return
activities, it acts as a major constraint on the accumulation of
productiveassets.Hence,suchhouseholdsareexposedtoextremerisk,
for example from climatic fluctuations. Vulnerability is intensified by
lack of education and high dependency rates. The ultimate reason for
this predicament is the lack of penetration into rural Mozambique of
marketinstitutions,aproblemseentobeexacerbatedbytheexperience
ofwarfarethatdisruptedtransportnetworksandheightenedexchange-
related insecurity and increased productive risk. The problem of
(cid:34)(cid:36) PolicyReductionStrategies,ii. (cid:34)(cid:37) Ibid.,p.5.
108 christopher cramer and nicola pontara
isolationextendstothosewhocultivatecashcrops,sinceitisestimated
in the RPP that almost two-thirds of those households that cultivate
(cid:34)(cid:38)
cash crops do not market their produce.
Anotherreinforcing featureof povertyis theweak intensityof useof
productive inputs. There is negligible use of fertilisers, mechanical
tools or animal draught power and, while this makes labour power
particularly critical to agricultural reproduction, household labour
supply is limited by prevailing household structure. Household
structure, on average, is dominated by a dependency ratio of 110 (i.e.
for every 100 persons of working age there are 110 dependents).
Moreover,hiredlabourisnotmuchused:lessthan20percentofrural
households use hired labour. To the extent that hired labour does
feature, it is greater in the north, an estimation that may conflict with
theportrayalofthenorthaslessintegratedintomarkets,moreisolated.
Hired labour is greater among those with more land. This last
statement refers to absolute use of hired labour, not the relative
intensityoflabouruse.Indeed,theRPPalsoassertsthatthereisaclear
inverserelationshipbetweensizeoflandholdingandintensityoflabour
(cid:34)(cid:39)
use; it does not consider why this might be so, or how it might be
subject to change. While the implications of this are not explicitly
drawn out, this allusion to the size–productivity debate in agriculture
does seem to inform the policy preference in the official literature for
support to small farmers rather than larger farmers.
Land holdings generally are small. Nationally, 29 per cent of rural
householdscultivatelessthan1hectare:butinthecentreandsouththe
proportion cultivating less than 1 hectare is closer to 40 per cent.(cid:34)(cid:40)
Security of land tenure is regarded as problematic, too (Table 2). It is
suggestedthat less thanone-third of rural householdshad legal title to
the land they cultivated. Although the RPP states that the essential
pointatpresentisthatthereisgreatuncertaintyoverrightstolanduse,
the document adopts a relatively optimistic attitude to the problem,
pointing to evidence from Nampula suggesting that where official
concessions are made in areas already farmed by smallholders without
appropriate ‘legal’ entitlements, then compensation is usually made.
The significance of this issue is backed up by the PAU’s Poverty
Reduction Strategy (PRS), which opens with the statement that the
‘equitable growth of agriculture can not be achieved without secure
(cid:34)(cid:41)
land tenure’.
(cid:34)(cid:38) Ibid.,p.11. (cid:34)(cid:39) Ibid.,p.12. (cid:34)(cid:40) Ibid.,iv. (cid:34)(cid:41) GOM,ii,1995.
rural poverty in mozambique 109
Table 2
Land tenure: sources of acquisition of machambas (%)
Allocatedby Purchased
Traditional Formal With Without
Regions authority authority Borrowed Occupied title title Others Total
North 11(cid:177)4 3(cid:177)6 8(cid:177)2 48(cid:177)7 0(cid:177)6 24(cid:177)1 3(cid:177)5 100(cid:177)0
Central 28(cid:177)9 6(cid:177)2 7(cid:177)6 21(cid:177)9 2(cid:177)2 30(cid:177)7 2(cid:177)5 100(cid:177)0
South 32(cid:177)0 18(cid:177)5 11(cid:177)0 13(cid:177)9 1(cid:177)9 21(cid:177)1 1(cid:177)6 100(cid:177)0
Total 24(cid:177)5 9(cid:177)1 8(cid:177)8 27(cid:177)8 1(cid:177)6 25(cid:177)8 2(cid:177)5 100(cid:177)0
Source: Poverty Alleviation Unit, Mozambique: Rural Poverty Profile (Ministry of Agriculture,
1996).
Women are especially vulnerable in rural Mozambique. They are
lesslikelythanmentohaveoff-farmemployment.Some25percentof
rural households are female-headed, according to the 1991 National
Demographic Survey (though an alternative survey estimates the
proportionat19percent).Theshareofhouseholdsheadedbywomen
increases from the north through the centre to the south, and those in
the north appear to be more likely to be unmarried female household
heads. The higher incidence of female (and married female) headship
inthesouthislinkedexplicitlytotheimpactofmigration,particularly
totheminesinSouthAfrica,ontheruraleconomyofthesouth.Hence,
in the representation of poverty as more acute among female-headed
households, the RPP also assumes, without further analysis, that out-
migration from rural Mozambique is clearly a negative economic
factor, chiefly because it increases the dependency ratio and reduces
labour availability. While women are shown by the profile to be more
readily exposed to extreme poverty, and while the RPP at one stage
suggeststhatitisharderforMozambicanruralfemalestogetaccessto
off-farmemployment,atotherpointsadifferentemphasisissuggested.
For it is estimated by one source on which the RPP draws that 37 per
(cid:34)(cid:42)
centoflabourhiredforlandpreparationisfemalelabour. Thisisput
in the context of a reportedly typical gender division of labour,
wherebymen prepare land and women cultivate it. The potential link
between female wage labour and survival strategies of the poorest
people in Mozambique, however, is not drawn out.
(cid:34)(cid:42) GOM,PolicyReductionStrategies,p.26.
110 christopher cramer and nicola pontara
Because of the emphasis on aggregation, it is characteristic of this
document that it plays down the evidence of social and economic
differentiation that its data nevertheless convey. Indeed, the only
category of differentiation among the Mozambican peasantry that
attracts any sustained attention in the report is that of geography.
Again and again, distinctions are drawn between the features of rural
poverty in the north, the centre and the south, most of them based on
two factors: variations in agro-climatic conditions and differences in
historicalexperience,forexampleinintegrationintoregionalSouthern
African labour markets via labour migration.
The priorities of the PAU are suggested by the RPP–the chief one
beingtoeliminatetheisolationofthepoorsincethisisregardedasthe
dominant characteristic of rural poverty in Mozambique–but are
given greater emphasis, though still inadequate elaboration, in the
PovertyReductionStrategy(PRS).ThePRSfocuses,aboveall,onthe
interlinkedprioritiesofincentives,informationandinfrastructure.This
involves standard ‘market friendly’ policies. Improving rural liveli-
hoods is to be achieved by means of maximising competition in
(cid:35)(cid:33)
agricultural markets and hence further market liberalisation; by
publicising market prices; and by investing in rural infrastructure,
especially roads, to raise the supply response of smallholders to
improved market incentives. This core strategy is to be supported by
improvementsintheprovisionofandaccesstoprimaryeducationand
healthcare, safe water and sanitation, and by the establishment of a
comprehensive poverty database at the national level.
In short, poverty in rural Mozambique is associated with market
isolation and the lack of off-farm income sources, with a young
population and dependency ratios that are especially high where out-
migration is a frequent option for working-age males, with female
headed households, and with insecurity of land rights. Where there is
social and economic differentiation, it is not a factor of dynamic
significance, but rather a less than emphatic factor resulting from
geographical and, implicitly, conjunctural factors (not even the latter
are explored). On the basis of a ‘snapshot’ that stresses these features,
a set of clear strategic measures is outlined. The ultimate aim of these
measures appears to be the stabilisation of population and livelihoods
on the basis of smallholder farming. Alternatives that consider more
assertive measures for combining incentives with risk reduction, in
ordermorerapidlytopromoteengagementintheproductionofhigher
(cid:35)(cid:33) GOM,p.16,1995.