Defining rural development policies

The 1980s were marked by the implementation of Structural Adjustment Policies (SAPs) in the agricultural sector.

These policies led to the withdrawal of instruments supporting the sector (realignment system, stabilisation board), making producers more vulnerable to changes in international prices; this was even more so given that the trade policies triggered the liberalisation of trade while there was increased competition from Asia and subsidised agriculture from OECD countries. Furthermore, agricultural liberalisation encouraged the transfer of certain State activities and powers to private actors and Farmers’ Organisations, which now play a greater role in the sector’s organisation or in the definition of rural strategies at the national and local levels.

At the same time, rural development management has evolved towards greater decentralisation, while participatory mechanisms and procedures have also developed, either as pilot projects or as more important institutional reforms. They tend to involve local actors to a greater extent and to give them the opportunity to take part in planning and implementing initiatives concerning them. However, such practices are not widespread and there may be very various degrees of participation and decentralisation/centralisation in different countries, giving rise to five groups of countries according to their typology. While consultation processes are developing everywhere, effective participation by populations in managing their affairs often still remains at a pilot stage in many countries and the transfer of powers and responsibilities is unevenly distributed.

At the regional level, strategies and policies are being drawn up or implemented: the UEMOA’s agricultural policy, the CILSS’ Strategic Framework for Food Security, the ECOWAS/CILSS sub-regional programme combating desertification and the ECOWAS agricultural policy framework for West Africa (ECOWAP). Like economic operators, farmers’ organisations grouped together at the regional level play a greater role in drafting and directing these policies. Thus, the intervention of ROPPA members (West African Network of Farmers’ Organisations and Agricultural Producers) in national workshops has made it possible to influence debates on the ECOWAS Common Agricultural Policy (ECOWAP). Beyond the regional level, these organisations have gained greater weight and take part in international negotiations. Some institutions have been particularly active along side the C4 countries (Benin, Burkina Faso, Mali and Chad) in trade negotiations at the World Trade Organization (WTO): the African Cotton Association (ACA), the African Producers’ Association (APROCA) and ROPPA.

West Africa is facing two major political challenges. Firstly, national political solidarity needs to be reinforced in order to defend the countries’ and region’s interests. The benefits of such action could be seen when cotton-producing countries – Benin, Burkina Faso, Mali and Chad – joined forces during the WTO negotiations. However, the same needs to be done now during the trade negotiations to be held within the framework of the Economic Partnership Agreements (EPA) with the European Union or partnerships with new actors, such as China, India or Brazil. How can ECOWAS countries reconcile their different interests? And secondly, more consideration must be given to complementarities between production basins and consumers’ needs, as well as to the common resources shared between different regions. Strategies focused on the development of cross-border regions or basins on the basis of their comparative advantages need to be furthered.