Abstract
This paper searches for the most effective technology for agricultural growth in Africa on the basis of
FAO data available during the last forty years. The paper discusses the challenges for agricultural
growth and evaluates the development assistance that was made by donors to the agricultural sector in
Africa in comparison to the sector’s performance and its growth during the last two decades. An
analysis of the total versus per capita food production is conducted in relation to food exports and
imports to identify the magnitude of the food problem in Africa and raise awareness of its future trend in
the search for practical solutions.
The paper analyses five major variables of food production to explain the poor performance of the
agricultural sector and concludes on the most effective factor to accelerate food supply as a mean to
poverty reduction in Africa. In addition to the graphical analysis, a simple ordinary least squares (OLS)
model is used to estimate an African food production and explain some of the divergences. Further, an
alternate specification uses only three variables in a logarithmic model to confirm results obtained from
the graphical analysis and the OLS model. The variables included in the analysis are land expansion,
irrigation, mechanization, high yielding varieties, and fertilizers.
The findings of the study suggest that the most effective production factors for increasing food supply
and reducing poverty are the use of high yielding varieties and improved seeds along with the applica-
tion of appropriate fertilizers. Since high yielding varieties are produced by the agricultural research
services, the paper looks more deeply into biological gradients and the yield potential impact through
the African experience. The findings show that HYV seeds and fertilizers would increase cereal pro-
duction by 75 percent with appropriate extension. The study examines other evidence from agricultural
research in Africa and concludes that the field ex-post rate of return for the application of agricultural
technologies in most of the cereals reaches 97 and 87 percent.
Having shown that biotechnology is the only effective technique for future food supply growth, attention
is given to the African capacity of agricultural research and technology. The paper examines the ingre-
dients of research and its efficiency and sustainability. Further, the paper developed and proposed an
analytical technique using a capacity compound factor (research return and researchers intensity) to
categorize African countries into four groups based on their AgGDP, research expenditure, number of
researchers and population in each country. This identifies the need to strengthen the existing research
institutions and establish a systematic improved seed production and distribution system in the African
countries strengthened by rural infrastructure and marketing development.
For poverty to be reduced in Africa, the paper provides several scientific evidences that biotechnology
is the only way for boost food supply surplus. Poverty in Africa can be significantly and sustainably
reduced in a short period of time through intensive support to the usage of improved seeds, tissue
culturing and micro-propagation along with self-reliance in the production of fertilizers. In this respect,
the paper proposed a four-component strategy for rural development and poverty reduction in Africa.
The four components are i) capacity building for technology transfer; ii) rural infrastructure for im-
proved linkage to markets; iii) promotion of private sector for pre and post-harvest commercial activi-
ties; and iv) rural micro-finance for accessibility to farm inputs.
4
Sami Zaki Moussa
Résumé
Le présent document examine la technologie la plus efficace pour assurer la croissance agricole en
Afrique, sur la base des données recueillies ces quarante dernières années par la FAO. Ce document
analyse les défis qui se posent à la croissance agricole et évalue l’assistance au développement apportée
par les donateurs au secteur agricole africain, par rapport à la performance du secteur et à sa croissance
au cours des deux dernières décennies. L’analyse de la production vivrière totale comparée à la production
par habitant est faite par rapport aux exportations et aux importations de denrées alimentaires, pour
cerner l’ampleur du problème alimentaire en Afrique et susciter une prise de conscience de son évolution
future alors que des solutions pratiques sont recherchées.
Ce document analyse cinq grandes variables de la production vivrière pour expliquer la performance
médiocre du secteur agricole et conclut en présentant le facteur le plus déterminant pour accélérer la
production vivrière comme instrument de lutte contre la pauvreté en Afrique. Outre l’analyse graphique,
une méthode classique des moindres carrés est utilisée pour estimer la production vivrière africaine et
expliquer certaines divergences. Ensuite, une autre spécification utilise uniquement trois variables dans
un modèle logarithmique, pour confirmer les conclusions de l’analyse graphique et de la méthode classique
des moindres carrés. Les variables introduites dans l’analyse sont l’expansion des terres, l’irrigation, la
mécanisation, les variétés à haut rendement et les engrais.
Les conclusions de l’étude portent à croire que les facteurs de production les plus efficaces pour accroître
les disponibilités alimentaires et réduire la pauvreté sont l’utilisation de variétés à haut rendement et de
semences améliorées, ainsi que l’épandage d’engrais appropriés. Compte tenu du fait que les variétés à
haut rendement sont produites par les services de recherche agricole, ce document procède à un examen
plus approfondi des gradients biologiques et de l’incidence du potentiel de rendement, en se basant sur
l’expérience du continent africain. Il ressort des conclusions que les semences de variétés à haut rendement
et les engrais devraient faire augmenter la production céréalière de 75 pour cent si leur utilisation est bien
vulgarisée. L’étude examine d’autres éléments probants de la recherche agricole en Afrique et conclut
que le taux de rentabilité ex-post sur le terrain de l’application des technologies agricoles atteint 97 et 87
pour cent pour la plupart des céréales.
Ayant démontré que la biotechnologie est la seule technique efficace pour augmenter la production
vivrière à l’avenir, ce document examine les capacités africaines de recherche et de technologie agricoles.
Il analyse les éléments de la recherche, son efficacité et sa durabilité. Puis, il élabore et propose une
technique analytique utilisant un facteur composé de capacité (rendement de la recherche et intensité
des chercheurs) pour classer les pays africains dans quatre groupes, sur la base du PIB agricole, des
dépenses de recherche, du nombre de chercheurs et de la population de chaque pays. Il en ressort la
nécessité de renforcer les institutions de recherche existantes et de créer un réseau de production et de
distribution systématique de semences améliorées dans les pays africains, appuyé par le développement
de l’infrastructure rurale et de la commercialisation.
Pour réduire la pauvreté en Afrique, ce document présente plusieurs preuves scientifiques du fait que la
biotechnologie est le seul moyen de stimuler la production alimentaire et de générer des surplus. En
Afrique, il est possible de réduire la pauvreté de manière très sensible et durable en un court laps de
temps. Pour cela, l’utilisation de semences améliorées, la culture tissulaire, le micro-bouturage et
l’autosuffisance dans la production d’engrais, doivent bénéficier d’un soutien intensif. À cet égard, ce
document a proposé une stratégie africaine de développement rural et de lutte contre la pauvreté à
quatre volets. Il s’agit des quatre composantes suivantes : i) le renforcement des capacités de transfert
technologique ; ii) une infrastructure rurale pour faciliter la liaison avec les marchés ; iii) la promotion du
secteur privé dans le domaine des activités commerciales avant et après la récolte ; et iv) l’accès au
micro-financement rural pour l’acquisition d’intrants agricoles.
Technology Transfer for Agricultural Growth in Africa

5
*The author is a Division Manager, Agriculture and Rural Development Department, Central and West Region. The author
wishes to acknowledge the valuable comments received from Mr. P.M. Kaindaneh, Economist, Mr. Sam Onwona, Chief
Agricultural Economist, and Mr. John Kanyarubona, Principal Economist.
Technology Transfer for Agricultural
Growth in Africa
by
Sami Zaki Moussa*
Introduction
As the 20
th century rolled into the 21
st century, the moment has come to step back from regular
daily problems and think how agriculture sector growth in the African countries could be accelerated.
How could poverty be significantly reduced in shorter time frame at least cost? If the world economy
is growing and technological means are available, why are the African countries still experiencing
poor economic performance and widespread poverty?
Billions of dollars have been invested in Africa to develop and stimulate the growth of the agriculture
sector during the past three decades. Yet it is widely recognized that little was achieved in motivating
agricultural sector growth in spite of the large volume of investment in Africa. Weak institutions
and internal economic policies are usually blamed for the poor performance. However, there is an
increasing observation that the form in which international assistance provided is considered partially
responsible for the poor economic performance.
Over the past several decades, the rate of growth in world food production has exceeded the
population growth rate except in Sub-Saharan Africa. Further, during the last three decades, the
average per capita food consumption increased for all developing regions except Sub-Saharan
Africa. With its second highest rate of increase in cereal imports, Sub-Saharan Africa will face the
greatest challenge in meeting food demand in the next decade. Net food import to Sub-Saharan
Africa could increase by as much as 4 times by 2010. Statistics also indicate that expected change
in food supply, demand and prices are very sensitive to small changes in population and / or yield
growth rates. World food prices may increase by 40-70 percent as a result of a 20 percent
decline in the growth rate of the yield per hectare.
Scarcity of financial resources with increasing net food imports and world food prices raises concerns
of poverty outlook in African countries. Financing the expected increase in the cereal imports by
the developing countries will depend mainly on their export earnings and on food aid. On one
hand, the export earnings depend on international market prices and the rate of economic growth
of the developed countries and, on the other hand, food aid depends on the surplus of food
production and the competing demands for the development assistance among developing countries
in the world. However, food aid as well as financing food imports neither lead to development nor
reduce poverty. This signifies the vitality of agriculture development as the only option for Africa in
order to achieve food security, reduce poverty and improve the quality of life of its population.
6

?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?

Pop./1000
hers
No.Researc


.


AgGDP


=

CCF
Exp
Technology Transfer for Agricultural Growth in Africa
37

Table 4.1: Research Categorization for Development Finance in Africa
Category Characteristics Type of Research Topics
Country
Research
One
CCF >= 2.0
Applied Traditional Exports Cameroon, Cape Verde,
and Adaptive
Minor Food Crops
Guinea, Ivory Coast,
AgGDP >= 1.0%
Screening and
High-input non-traditional
Congo, Mauritius,
Testing Natural Resource Management
Seychelles, and Uganda.
Livestock
Socio-economics and rural
Two
CCF >= 2.0
Applied Minor Food Crops
Algeria, Egypt, Ghana,
and Adaptive
High-input non-traditional Mauritania, Niger, Nigeria,
AgGDP < 1.0% Screening and
Natural Resource Management
Sierra Leone, Somalia, and
Testing
Livestock
Sudan.
Socio-economics and rural
Three
CCF < 2.0
Adaptive
High-input non-traditional
Libya, Morocco, Tunisia,
and Screening and
Natural Resource Management Burkina Faso, Gambia,
AgGDP >= 1.0% Testing
Livestock
Guinea-Bissau, Liberia,
Socio-economics and rural
Mali, Senegal, Togo,
Gabon, Sao Tome, Lesotho,
Malawi, Botswana,
Swaziland, Zambia,
Zimbabwe, Comoros, and
Kenya.
Four
CCF < 2.0
Screening and
Natural Resource Management Benin, Chad, Burundi,
and Testing
Livestock
Central Africa, Rwanda,
AgGDP < 1.0% Socio-economics and rural Zaire, Angola, Madagascar,
Mozambique, Ethiopia, and
Tanzania.
Source: Developed from the analysis conducted by the author.
traditional, natural resource management, livestock, and socio-economics and rural engineering.
Those countries are Libya, Morocco, Tunisia, Burkina Faso, Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, Liberia,
Mali, Senegal, Togo, Gabon, Sao Tome & Principle, Botswana, Lesotho, Malawi, Swaziland,
Zambia, Zimbabwe, Comoros, and Kenya.
Fourth Category:
Fourth category includes the RMCs that have CCF less than 2.0 points, and spend less than 1.0%
of the annual AgGDP. In this category, there are 11 countries satisfy the above said characteristics.
These countries lie in the in-efficient category for conducting some types and topics of agricultural
research. Recommended research type is screening and testing for natural research management,
livestock, and socio-economics and rural development. Those countries are Benin, Chad, Burundi,
Central Africa Republic, Rwanda, Zaire, Angola, Madagascar, Mozambique, Ethiopia, and
Tanzania.
However, the above categorization analysis of the RMCs is not a static classification. Data used in
this analysis is average data for the period of 1981-85. Updated data will re-rank RMCs among
the above four categories according to their research return factor RRF, research intensity ratio
38
Sami Zaki Moussa
RIR, and AgGDP. Further, diversity of research, range of disciplines, and length of technical
equipment acquired is proposed as additional criteria to assess the research capacity and scope
of the NARS.
Part Five: Strategy for Rural Poverty Reduction
I. Findings: Summary and Conclusion
A theoretical review of the main factors for agricultural development, suggested that there are
three factors that could contribute to the future increase in food supply in Africa, which are i)
expansion of land under cultivation, ii) irrigation intensive development, and iii) biological increase
in yield. Further, recent studies debate that only through biological increase in yield the future food
supply would significantly increase. The debate focuses on the world food production in general
as an observation from previous experience. No specific review was made to the food production
situation in the different continents or specifically in Africa. The graphical and time series analysis
in this paper focused on the major explanatory variables by adding two more production factors
(mechanization and fertilizers) to the above mentioned three variables. Preliminary results provide
us with important observations concerning the most effective technology for agricultural growth in
Africa. The preliminary time series analysis included four additional factors. These are land expansion,
irrigation, mechanization and fertilizers in addition to the biological increase in yield as the major
food production related factors.
Obtained results are somewhat pertinent to the theoretical argument, which is the theme of this
paper. In Africa, expansion of land under cultivation as well as irrigation technology has little
impact on simulating agricultural production. In other words, agricultural growth could be accelerated
significantly without bringing more land under cultivation. Furthermore, all over Africa, there has
been an increase of interest in boosting food production in a sustainable environmental framework,
precisely because governments and researchers have realized that the land frontier for increased
food production has been reached.
In order to obtain robust results, an econometric model is built in two forms for more depth
statistical analysis of the above mentioned five factors of agricultural development. This paper
concluded that high yielding varieties and fertilizer application are the major two factors that have
steady impact on food supply increase.
One pertinent conclusion that could be drawn from the above graphical and econometric scenarios
is that agricultural research in Africa must focus on adoption and multiplication of HYVs with
improved extension and distribution / delivery systems. This would enable the dissemination of the
technology and its attendant agronomic practices, such as the use of appropriate fertilizer. It must
also be realized that fertilizer use requires production investment that the samllholder farmers, who
dominate cereal production in Africa, would find difficult to make.
The result of the statistical analysis, which proves the relevance of HYVs and fertilizer, is further
underscored, with different weights, by using filed data analysis (Carr, J.S. 1989). For a maize
yield of 4,000 kg/ha, improved and hybrid (HYV) technology accounts for 20 percent and fertilizer
Technology Transfer for Agricultural Growth in Africa
39
application contributes a staggering 51 percent (table 3.1). Narrowing the gap between existing
and achievable maize yield through technology transfer would increase the yield by about 70
percent. In addition, more yield increase could be achieved in combination with the appropriate
agronomic practices such as the recommended plant density, timely planting, weeding and harvesting.
Appropriate extension would add 10 percent and pest control 4 percent for the yield to reach 85
percent increase in each cultivated hectare. In the absence of HYV and fertilizer use, the best
yield estimate would be 600 kg/ha, even with the recommended agronomic practices. It is important
to note that this lower level of 600 kg/ha is the average dominant level of cereal productivity in
most African countries.
The results underscore the position of this paper, that in the short term, the key to increased
agricultural production and subsequently food-self sufficiency is the availability and affordability
of HYVs of the major staples and fertilizers to the smallholder farmers. As long as farmers are not
producing enough to feed themselves, poverty-reduction will just be a dream for the poor population
in Africa. Government policies and commitments on poverty reduction must pay more than lip
service to food self-sufficiency, with necessary rural infrastructure for practical extension and
marketing of the surplus.
Needles to say that for poverty to be reduced there is serious need to build the capacity of the
existing NARSs in African countries in a sustainable and long-term approach. It is recommended
that in providing development assistance and finance for capacity building of the existing agricultural
research institutions (NARS), countries be focused in their research on the proposed types and
topics of research in table 4.1. Further, producing improved seed by itself is not a enough solution
for shortage of food supply. Seed must be accessible to poor farmers and food production must
be marketable. In this respect, seed distribution need to be strengthened through promotion of the
private sector and rural roads need to be constructed for seed distribution to be possible and for
marking to be particle. Without development of a sustainable seeds distribution system and marketing
access, research support would be ineffective effort.
In general, using fertilizer to raise agricultural production per unit of area is an effective alternate
for the expansion of land area. Fertilizer may also lead to land saving by reducing erosion, building
up soil fertility and structure, and improving its water-holding capacity. Fertilizers should be viewed
as a vertical expansion of economic productive land. Unfortunately, fertilizer is not being widely
used by African farmers. Only 13 out of 38 African countries use more than 10 Kg N-P-K fertilizer
per hectare of arable land, and only five countries used over 20 Kg per hectare. On the other
hand, total fertilizer used in SSA was about 3.4 million tons by the mid-1990s. FAO estimated
that a six-fold increase in fertilizer use to six million tons would be needed in Africa between 1990
and 2010 to raise agriculture production by 2.9% per year. Africa accounts for only 2.25% of the
developing world’s fertilizer consumption.
The slow expansion of fertilizer use by African farmers during the last two decades is attributed to
a mixture of factors affecting supply and demand such as (i) price decreases for export crops (ii)
reduction in fertilizer imports, due to foreign exchange problems and (iii) removal of government
subsidies form fertilizer. It is important to state that the form in which the international development
assistance provided to developing countries, is particular responsible for the poor economic
performance of Africa. With the new reform policies and economic sector adjustment programs, it
40
Sami Zaki Moussa
was made clear that no more international finance would be made to the public sector for agricultural
development including manufacturing of fertilizers. Furthermore, line of credit finance is not reaching
the poor in the rural areas. With the weak private sector in Africa, the hope to develop fertilizer
manufacturing is minimal. Thus, donor community and international finance institutions need to
develop new lending instruments as an appropriate form of finance that would develop the local
production of fertilizer in African countries. Such lending instrument could be through international
partnership for know-how and technology transfer of fertilizers manufacturing.

II. Present Situation and Outlook
There is strong evidence of the linkage between agricultural research and poverty reduction.
Agricultural research helps to produce the technology and the knowledge necessary for sustainable
agricultural development, which is essential for economic growth. Rural economic growth, in turn
is the most effective instrument for poverty reduction in countries where the majority of the poor
live in rural areas.
For effective poverty reduction effort, innovative thinking to re-orient the present design of
agricultural development projects is required. With the increasing recognition of the importance of
poverty reduction, we have to accept that the regular present development project as a lending
instrument has minimal effect on poverty reduction. Development assistance data shows that the
an annual US$5 billion for agricultural sector in Africa, unable to keep the annual agricultural
growth rate (2.6%) at the rate of population growth (2.7%) so that the average food production
today is below that of 1960s.
Statistical analysis and field results indicate the relevance of hybrid seeds and fertilizer. For maize
yield, the use of improved and hybrid technology along with appropriate application of fertilizers
accounts for 71 percent. Further yield increase could be achieved in combination with the
appropriate agronomic practices. Appropriate extension and pest control would add 14 percent
for maize yield to reach 85 percent increase in each cultivated hectare (table 3.1).
During the last two decades, African countries produced an annual average of 93 million metric
tons of cereals from an annual average cultivated area of 8.42 million hectares. Average annual
consumption of cereals was about 123.73 million metric tons leaving an increased gap of
consumption of about an annual average of 30.73 million metric tons, which is closed by imports.
Using the same area of land that is currently used for cereal production - 8.42 million hectares -
with the same extension and pest control level of technology, the consumption gap could be
completely closed by a widespread usage of improved and hybrid seeds along with appropriate
use of fertilizers. Closing the gap would require an increased in the cereal production less than 35
percent. The production consumption gap, which illustrated in Figure 5.1 would be closed by
increasing the cereal yield from about 11 ton per hectare to 14.8 ton per hectare. This estimate is
made under the following assumption i) fixed irrigation development; ii) static extension; iii) continuos
annual population growth of 2.6 percent; and iv) static pest control technology. Although most of
these assumptions are realistic, it is expected that irrigation development would continue and
accelerate the narrowing the cereal production consumption gap.
Technology Transfer for Agricultural Growth in Africa
41
It should be noticed that the required development effort toward rural poverty reduction would
not be a result of one single piece of technology, but an interaction effects should be considered
when a strategic planning is put in place. However, in the absence of HYV and fertilizer use, the
best yield estimate would be 600 kg/ha, even with the recommended agronomic practices.
III.
The Strategy
Building on the concluded results of this study, design of development project need to focus on i)
capacity building for biotechnology; ii) private sector promotion for farm input distribution; iii)
rural infrastructure for market linkage; and iv) rural credit for financing access to farm inputs. The
following four-component development strategy for rural poverty reduction is proposed for decision-
makers’ consideration.
1) Capacity Building for Technology Transfer
The revolution in the biological sciences promises powerful new tools for generic improvement of
food crop and livestock species. Most of the world’s top 300 companies, spending on agricultural
research and development surpasses US$ 24 billion, are private sector companies. This large
investments in biotechnology research also has major implications for poverty reduction because
their research finding priorities often miss the crops that are vital to the poor in the developing
world.
Best usage of biotechnology require careful judgement of research capacity and experience in
research priorities. Recognizing the importance of biotechnology as the keyword for agricultural
growth and rural poverty reduction, human resources is the number one constraint that facing
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
1961
1963
1965
1967
1969
1971
1973
1975
1977
1979
1981
1983
1985
1987
1989
1991
1993
1995
1997
1999
Million MT
Prod. MT
Cons. MT
Figure 5.1: Cereal Production and Consumption Gap
in Africa (1961-2000)
42
Sami Zaki Moussa
most developing countries today. The second constraint facing biological yield increase and
appropriate application is the availability of fertilizers.
Biotechnology as the keyword for agricultural growth and rural poverty reduction is achievable
through biological yield increase and appropriate application of fertilizers. The starting point for
African countries is the human resource development and research skills building. The second
step, is that finance and development assistance should be made to scientific research and capacity
building of the existing agricultural research institutions (NARS), for biological yield increase through
the development and adoption of improved seeds appropriate to the local agricultural characteristics
including soil fertility, plant disease, and local agricultural practices. Size and type of development
assistance will depend on the existing capacity of the NARS institutions. The proposed types and
topics of research in table 4.1 could be used as a guide for aide allocation.
For capacity building of human resources, International Services for National Agricultural Research
(ISNAR) developed and conducted a management training course to help practitioners on the
frontline of biotechnology management develop their skills. The training course includes also
management of information technology for agricultural research program which strengthen the link
between industry, universities, and research institutions by means of information. Further, ISNAR
developed Biotechnology Services (IBC), to prevent a growing information gap between
industrialized countries and developing countries in biotechnology-related areas. IBC has internet-
based information forum that provides interactive interface with biotechnology trainees.
Usage of high yielding varieties requires application of suitable fertilizers in order to maximize the
yield of hybrid varieties. Without fertilizers, usage of the hybrid seeds will not significantly reduce
poverty in Africa. However, the reform policies and sector adjustment programs discourage
government finance for public sector manufacturing. On the other hand, the private sector is still
weak and needs longer time to grow. It is proposed therefore, that donor community and
international finance institutions develop new lending instruments to promote private sector for
local production of fertilizer in African countries. Such lending instrument could be through
international partnership for know-how and technology transfer of fertilizers manufacturing.
2) Private Sector Promotion
Production of improved seeds and or high yielding varieties would lose its effectiveness in increasing
food supply in the absence of sufficient distribution system. In Africa countries, when improved
seeds are available but not for the poor farmers or even not available on the right time for plantation.
They are ineffective for simulating food supply. Promotion of the private sector to grow and take
the initiative in farm inputs distribution, agro-business, and marketing of outputs needs to be further
investigated. Innovative approaches must be proposed by marketing and business expertise. For
the private sector to expand and grow in steady steps in African countries there is grave need to
introduce “business decentralization” using “car-dealer” trading approach.
In application of such business technique, the private sector would contract a farmer at each
village to provide secured storage facilities and act as sub-dealer for the distribution of the farm
inputs. Also, agro-industry and food processing including storage techniques will all create markets
to absorb food and horticulture production and simulated yield increase and thus farm income
growth.
Technology Transfer for Agricultural Growth in Africa
43
3) Rural Infrastructure
Rural road is indispensable instrument for poverty reduction in African countries. Market facilities
promote rural production. Marketing is a function of roads, storage, processing facilities, and
purchasing power. Although, purchasing power is week in poor countries, roads would provide
producers with actual sizable local market, promote private sector, job creation and activate market
economy and competition. Impact of biotechnology investment for higher crop yield would be
minimal without rural rods.
Lesson learned from agricultural development in African countries proved that farmers in remote
areas are losing when assisted by distribution of improved seeds and fertilizer under “safety net”
program. These free farm input led to surplus of cereal production in the rural areas where traders
could not smoothly reach. In absence of rural roads, prices decreased and producers would not
able to recover their cost of production mainly because transportation cost is inefficient and
represents barrier for commercial farming and growth.
Technology transfer for higher food supply would not be effective without active private sector
and means of transportation. Needles to say that with poor or inadequate rural roads, high cost of
transportation is deducted from anticipated possible profit that could have been made by the poor
producers to cover their cost of production. It is saddening to cultivate for poor returns. Improved
or hybrid seeds without an appropriate distribution system and market linkage, rural development
would not be any more than poverty reduction dream for the donors and the poor.

4) Rural Micro-Finance
Concluding from the obtained results of this study, the most effective technology for agricultural
growth and poverty reduction is the usage of high yielding varieties with appropriate fertilizers.
These two production factors would generate another green revolution in Africa. Since the target
group of the Financial Development Institutions is the poor and since more than 72 percent of the
poor live in the rural areas, it seems that the only way out of rural poverty in Africa is by making
technology accessible to the rural poor.
Improved seeds could be affordable to large group of the rural poor farmers but appropriate
fertilizers will continue to be unaffordable to both government and poor farmers. Government due
to shortage of foreign currency and increasing price of fertilizer would not be able to import
enough fertilizers or even finance the private sector to import it at least for the coming twenty
years. For the poor farmers, who might not be able to sell his/her produce due to the high
transportation cost using inappropriate roads, affordability of fertilizer purchase is minimal.
Rural finance has become indispensable for accessible biological yield increase. Needles to say
that prices of farm inputs including its cost of transportation to the farm gate due to rural poor
roads is paid by the poorest of the society and not by the Government who is collecting taxes from
rich to help the poor. This raises a serious concern of the need to enable the macroeconomic
environment for rural development through the policy-based lending instrument.
44
Sami Zaki Moussa
Notes and References
1. The Green Revolution Technology requires using high yielding varieties with reliable water supply and
fertilizer application agreeable with these varieties.
2. Poverty line is defined by less than one dollar a day per person or US$ 350 a year per person according to
1993 survey data.
3. The World Bank. (1998). “African Development Indicators”.
4. The World Bank. (1998). “African Development Indicators”
5. Estimated at 28 percent of the gross disbursement flows of ODA
6. Average annual gross disbursement for the period.
7. Average annual gross disbursement for the period.
8. The World Bank. (1998). “Agricultural Intensification in Sub-Saharan Africa”.
9. Maddison, A. (1996). “Monitoring the World Economy: 1820-1992. Paris: OECD”.
10. The World Bank. (1999). “Agricultural Intensification in Sub-Saharan Africa”.
11. EPA=East Asia and Pacific, MENA=Middle East and North Africa, LAC=Latin America and Caribbean
12. The World Bank (1998). “African Development Indicators”.
13. The World Bank. (1998). “African Development Indicators”.
14. International Service for National Agricultural Research (ISNAR). (1991). “Towards A New Agricultural
Revolution: Research, Technology Transfer, and Application for Food Security in Africa”, (IFPRI/ISNAR).
Technology Transfer for Agricultural Growth in Africa
45
Annex I
Annex 1: National Agricultural Research Expenditures, Personnel Estimates,
and Capacity Compound Factor in Africa (Average 1981-85)
Country
Expenditure Total
AgGDP Expenditures
US$
Capacity
(Million US$)
Number of
(Million US$)
Per % per
Component
Researchers
Researcher
AgGDP
Factor
North Africa
Algeria 21.3 305
3,429 69,833 0.62 2.3
Egypt
44.7 4,246 5,906 10,528 0.76 12.4
Libya
20.1 127 874
158,567 2.30 1.5
Morocco
25.2 217
1,913 116,129 1.32 0.8
Tunisia 14.7 121 1,174 121,487 1.25 1.4
Sub-Total 126.0 5,016 13,296 25,120 0.95 —-
Western Africa
Benin 2.3 47 351 48,936 0.66 1.8
Burkina Faso
17.4 120 416 145,000 4.18 0.4
Cameroon
15.4 176 1,607 87,500 0.96 1.9
Cape Verde 0.2 16 19 12,500 1.05 5.0
Chad 1.6 28 241
57,142 0.66 0.8
Gambia 2.8 62 33 45,161 8.48 1.0
Ghana 2.9 147
2,173 19,727 0.13 8.8
Guinea 8.8 177 763
49,717 1.15 3.1
Guinea-Bissau 0.8 8 57
100,000 1.40 0.6
Ivory-Coast 28.8 201
2,622 143,283 1.10 1.9
Liberia 5.2 33 358 157,575 1.45 1.1
Mali
13.8 275 533 50,181 2.59 1.4
Mauritania 0.6 12 186
50,000 0.32 2.2
Niger 1.9 57 522
33,333 0.36 2.5
Nigeria 80.7
1003
31,048 80,458 0.26 4.3
Senegal 14.7 174 398 84,482 3.69 0.8
Sierra Leone 1.4 46
419 30,434 0.33 3.8
Togo 5.9 58 240 101,724 2.56 0.8
Sub-Total 205.2 2,640 21,986 77,727 0.93 —-
Central Africa
Burundi 4.4 56 540 78,571 0.81 1.5
Cent. A.R. 2.1 22 350
95,455 0.60 1.4
Congo 2.6 73 145
35,616 1.80 2.1
Gabon 2.6 24 175
108,333 1.49 1.6
Rwanda 2.1 34 643
61,765 0.33 1.8
Sao T.&P. 0.2 3 9
66,667 2.22 1.4
Zaire 4.0 43
2,344 93,023 0.17 0.8
Sub-Total 18.0 255 4,206 70,588 0.43 —-
46
Sami Zaki Moussa
Annex I:
Continued
Country
Expenditure Total
AgGDP Expenditures
US$
Capacity
(Million US$)
Number of
(Million US$)
Per % per
Component
Researchers
Researcher
AgGDP
Factor
Southern Africa
Angola 4.3 28 1,511 153,570 0.28 1.3
Botswana 5.8 56 90
103,570 6.44 0.9
Lesotho 6.0 18 59
333,333 10.17 0.1
Madagascar 6.6 82 921
80,488 0.72 1.1
Malawi 4.9 82 412 59,756 1.19 1.0
Mauritius 5.4 100 126
54,000 4.29 2.3
Mozambique 7.9 77 1,298
102,597 0.61 1.0
Swaziland 3.1 14 88
221,429 3.52 0.6
Zambia 4.0 110 396
36,364 1.01 1.7
Zimbabwe
16.6 166 595 100,000 2.79 0.7
Sub-Total
64.6 733 5,496 88,131 1.18 —-
Eastern Africa
Comoros 1.0 14 37 71,429 2.70 1.3
Ethiopia 11.8 136
1,911 86,765 0.62 0.5
Kenya 27.1
462 1,827
58,658 1.48 1.6
Seychelles 0.3 7 10
42,857 3.00 2.3
Somalia 0.4 31 513
12,903 0.07 5.2
Sudan 12.1 206 2,470 58,738 0.49 2.0
Tanzania 19.7 276 2,701 71,377 0.73 1.8
Uganda
12.5 185 1,319 67,568 0.95 2.2
Sub-Total
84.9 1,317 10,788 64,465 0.79 —-
Sub-Saharan Africa
372.7 1,944 42,476 75,384 0.88 —-
Total Africa
498.7 9,960 55,772 50,070 0.98 —-
* Number of researchers is estimated as full-time equivalents.
Source: Collected and calculated from different sources: (1) Philip G. Pardey, Agricultural Research Policy, International
Quantitative Perspectives, Cambridge University Press, 1989. (2) African Development Bank, Selected Statistics on
Regional Member Countries, 1994.