Title: Congressional mandate for Small Farmer Assistance ; reference: AIDTO CIRC A-617, October 31, 1975
CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00081816/00001
 Material Information
Title: Congressional mandate for Small Farmer Assistance ; reference: AIDTO CIRC A-617, October 31, 1975
Physical Description: Book
Language: English
Publisher: Department of State
Publication Date: 1975
 Subjects
Subject: Farming   ( lcsh )
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00081816
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.

Full Text

SAIRRAM


DEPARTMENT OF STATE

UNCLASSIFIED
CLASSFICAYION


For eah address check one ACTION I INFO


TO- A /I ir/r ,:J ct IJLAR A


jT
DISTRUTlON
ACTlpV

PPC 50
AATA
MP
PHA
PVC
TAAG
AFR 15
IDC
ES
SER
WFC
NE 15
OFP
4ASIA 15
LA 15
FFP
8ASIA 4
TA/N
AGRIC
OMB
STATE 5
OTHER AGENCY
CHRON.

1 2 3 8

TTACHMENT


630


."P -f lbsi~-~$
/#' ~932~


T95


DATE iECo.







DATE StEN


FROM WASHINGTON 11/11/7
E.O. 11652: N/A
SUBJECT CONGRESSIONAL MANDATE FOR SMALL FARMER ASSISTANCE


5


REFERENCE AIDTO CIRC A-617, October 31, 1975




Please substitute the attached paper, "Food Production
and Equity in Agricultural Producer Strategies" for the one
attached to refair.


Attachment:


"Food Production and Equity in Agricultural
Producer Strategies" (1 copy)


Send to List P

Please reproduce attachment as airgram.


KISSINGER


PAGE PAGES
t -: -_ OF
DRAFTED BY OFFICE PHOMN NO DATE APPROVED BYIt ,
Martha Mors ey PPC/PDA/DA 13692 11/10/75 AA/PPC, lexaner Shakow

AID AND OTHER CLEARANCES
SER/MP/DPC:WFradenburg (dft)

UNCLASSIFIED
CLASSIFICATION
AIDO.,S (.s62) (Do not type below ti li e) PRINTED 12-53






CLASSIFICATION


(AMIDE1

LIST P FOR A.I.D. AIRGRAMS AND TELEGRAM


LIST P


ABIDJAN
ACCRA
ADDIS ABABA
AMMAN
ANKARA
ASUNCION
BAMAKO
BANGKOK
BOGOTA
BRASILIA
BRIDGETOWN
CAIRO
COLOMBO
CONAKRY
COTONOU
DACCA
DAKAR
DAMASCUS
DAR ES SALAAM
FREETOWN


GEORGETOWN
GUATEMALA
ISLAMABAD
JAKARTA
KABUL
KATHMANDU
KHARTOUM
KINGSTON
KINSHASA
LAGOS
LA PAZ
LIMA
LISBON
MANAGUA
MANILA
MBABANE
MEXICO
MONROVIA
MONTEVIDEO
NAIROBI


S NEW DELHI
3 NDJAMENA
3 NIAMEY
2 NICOSIA
2 NOUAKCHOTT
2 OUAGADOUGOU
8 PANAMA
4 PORT AU PRINCE
7 QUITO
5 RABAT
2 SANA
5 SAN JOSE
5 SAN SALVADOR
5 SANTIAGO
5 SANTO DOMINGO
4 SEOUL
5 TEGUCIGALPA
6 TUNIS
2 USUN NEW YORK
2 YAOUNDE


CAPTIONS
3 BANGKOK FOR USOM AND RED

3 DAR ES SALAAM FOR SAID AND RDOEA/ARUSHA

4 GUATEMALA FOR SAID AND ROCAP

2 NAIROBI FOR SAID AND REDSO/EA
/1 ,.-".. -

CLASSIFICATION


60 POSTS b64 & 278 CYS WITH CAPTIONS}


8/13/75


rEND TO :


, ,, . .. .. ,... .,, ....... ...-- T -I - S N T O -


.1 J


>^





AIRGRAM
, .


For ech address check one ACTION INFO

TO- AIDTO CIRCULAR Abl7


DATE REC'D.
14SP/ 7


DATE BENT


FROM WASHINGTON 10/31/7
E.O. 11652: N/A
SUBJECT CONGRESSIONAL MANDATE FOR SMALL FARMER ASSISTANCE


S


REFERENCE AIDTO CIRC A-263, April 30, 1975


The 1975 proposed congressional legislation (Bill
H.R. 9005), clearly directs AID to concentrate its efforts
in the agricultural sector to assist small farmers and the
rural poor. Discussion within the Agency, however, has
raised the question of the effects of this focus on the
urgent need for expanded food supplies in many less deve-
loped countries (LDCs).

The attached paper, "Food Production and Equity in
Agricultural Producer Strategies", is a preliminary paper
which is intended to lead to a fuller realization of the
many factors and complex relationships involved in the
analysis of production and equity effects and to serve
as a point of departure for discussion leading to a better
articulated AID policy. The paper does not necessarily
constitute an "Agency view" of the issue, within AID/W.

Section I of this airgram summarizes the principal
points of the paper. Section II is a questionnaire which
the following Missions (selected jointly by the regional
bureaus and PPC) are requested to answer as completely
as possible: Nairobi, Dar-es-Salaam, Manila, Djakarta,
Managua, La Paz, Guatemala, Kabul, Islamabad, and Dacca.
Recognizing that Missions are heavily involved in project


CHRON
1 I2 3 4 7 8


PAQG PAGES
1 OF 6


OFFICE PHONE NO. OAT ArPROVED BY:,
artha Horsley PPC/PDA/DA 23692 10/29/75 AA/PPC, Alexander Shakow
AID AND OTHER CLEARANCES TA/AGR,WMerrill
PPC/PDA,CMichalopoulos fift) PPC/PDA,DRedding $Er Nesa/DP,BLangmaid(d
?PC/PDA,DDalrymple (dft) / PPC/PDA,DMcClelland (dft) EA/DP,PAskin (dft)
%FR/DP,FMoore (dft) UNCLASSIFIED TA/RDCBlankstin
zA/DP RSimpson (dft) cAss.ncAT.oN
AIo-5-3s (9-6z) (Do not type below this lin) PRINTIr 12s4-


DISTRIBUTION
ACTION


\TA
TA/RD
1IC

\AG
BC
SIRTATE
:R
: 15
=P
MSIA 15
A 15
_AB
-P
ASIA 4
A/NI


DEPARTMENT OF STATE
UNCLASSIfiED
CLAS89110CATION






AIRGRAM
CONTINUATION


DEPARTMENT OF STATE AIRGRAM


POST NO. CLASSIFICATION ;PAG PAME
AIDTO CIRCULAR A 617 UNCLASSIFIED orF


development through November 15, we request responses
as soon as possible but no later than mid-December. We
consider your cooperation in this regard extremely
important in our effort to gain greater understanding of
this important subject -- for both the development
community and the Congress. We ask you to give full and
thoughtful answers to the questions and provide us with
any additional views or comments which may be appropriate.
We would, of course, welcome completed questionnaires or
comments from other USAIDs as well.

I. Paper Summary

The principle points of the attached paper, "Food
Production and Equity in Agricultural Producer Strategies"
are summarized as follows:

-- The objective of food production and equity (i.e.,
increasing the real incomes of the poor) is intermediary
to the ultimate goal of achieving a minimum standard
of living for the bulk of the population in the LDCs.

-An optimum strategy for achieving these objectives
would probably involve major changes in the distribution
of productive resources, in pricihg policies, and in
organizational forms. Political and economic forces
impede reform, however. The effects of agricultural
producer strategies are therefore investigated,
assuming existing patterns of resource holdings,
market imperfections and organizational forms.

-Although there obviously exists a continuum of farm
sizes, the analysis is simplified by referring to
two broad categories, namely small farmers and large
farmers. A possible classification of agricultural
populations by farm size would include three categories:
"sub-marginals," "small farmers," and "medium/large
farmers." The first two categories constitute 80
to 90 percent of agricultural populations and would
be the focus of a small farmer strategy. A generally
unfocussed agricultural development program generally
turns out to be large farmer biased and hence is referred
to as a "large farmer strategy."



UNCLASSIFIED
AID.5.39A (9.62) CLAs.FP!CATION PRINTED 64





AIRGRAM DEPARTMENT OF STATE AIRGRAI
CONTINUATION
POSt NO. CLAsI81ICATION PAEI Me
AIDTO CIRCULAR A b 7 UNCLASSIFIED 3 OFi


-Evidence suggests that, on existing farms, the net
benefit from production (or value-added) per unit of
total cost is roughly constant across farm size.

Evidence and reasoning suggest that production increases
can be achieved in a shorter time period with a large
farmer strategy, but effective demand may not be
adequate for sustained growth. In the longer run,
production increases under a small farmer strategy
appear to have as much potential as under a large
farmer strategy.

-The equity effect of a large farmer strategy occurs
through a decline in consumer food prices; however,
it may be partly offset by the decline in the income
of small farmers and submarginals who have not partic-
ipated in the expansion program.

-A real danger is that large farm expansion in the short-
run may render small farmer development more difficult
in the future, in both economic and political terms.

The equity effect of a small farmer strategy occurs
directly through increased income and improved nutrition
accruing to the beneficiaries and indirectly through
the contribution of a small farm strategy to sustained
rural income generation in the long run.

-All things considered, a small farmer strategy appears
better suited to meet the combined food production and
equity, or minimum standard of living, goal over the
long run.

-Food aid may be one means of helping to fill the food
requirements gap during the longer gestation period
of the small farmer strategy.

II. Questionnaire

1. (a) Do you agree with the conclusion of the attached
paper that a small farmer strategy appears better to
achieve the combined food production and equity goal?




UNCLASSIFIEd


AID.5.39A (9-62)


PRINTED W


CLASIFIICATION





aIRGRAM DEPARTMENT OF STATE AIRGRAM
CONTINUATION
OST NO. CLASSIFICATION IPM PAGES
AIDTO CIRCULAR 7Ab7 uI CLASSTFTr~n 4 or 6


(b) Do you believe that a small farmer strategy for
AID programs in your country will lead to sacrificing
food output growth in the short run? In the long run?
By how much? Why?

2. (a) To what extent does your host country government
support an agricultural development strategy which
focuses primarily on small farmers and other members of
the rural poor? What do you see as major obstacles
to further commitment to such a strategy?

(b) To what extent is your host country government
engaged in major policy and/or institutional reforms
designed to facilitate implementation of a small farmer
strategy, e.g. land or tenancy reform, modified pricing
policies, and major rural development efforts? (Give
examples) What support, if any, is AID giving to these
efforts?

(c) How does your host country government view AID's
directives to concentrate its assistance on small farmers
and the rural poor?

3. (a) What criteria (e.g. farm size, income, geo-
graphical location) have you used to define "small
farmers" for AID programming purposes...(Be specific:
If income is one criterion, what'Cut-off level is
used and how do you obtain the necessary data? See
section III A of the attached paper for discussion of
some issues.)

i. What percentage of the total farm population
does your small farmer target group comprise?
Of the total rural population? (Such information
may have been reported in PP's.)

ii. Approximately what percentage of the
cultivated land does your small farmer target
group occupy?

iii. Approximately what percentage of total
agricultural output (by value) does this group
produce? Of basic food (i.e. foodgrains, pulses
and other basic foods consumed by lower income
groups) output?




CLAUIIICATION PRINTED &-6


ID.5.3A (9-.2)





IRGRAM DEPARTMENT OF STATE AIRGRAM
"bNTINUATION
IT NO. CLASSIFICATION PA P
AIDTO CIRCULAR A 617 UNCLASSIFIED 5 oF 6


(b) In practice, do you allow some deviation from
this definition among beneficiaries in projects which
you consider small farmer focused? What, if any, rules
of thumb do you use?

4. (a) How does your existing agricultural and rural
development assistance program relate to this small
farmer target group? (Please be specific: What percent
of total loan and technical assistance funds affecting
the farm population can be clearly identified as of
direct assistance to small farmers? Give names of the
activities funded. How have you measured the incidence?
What additional percent is of indirect assistance to
small farmers? How have you measured the incidence?)

(b) Does measuring the pattern of incidence present
a major problem for you? If it does, how do you address
it?,

(c) Do you anticipate further changes in your program
in response to AID's small farmer emphasis? (Please state
what specific changes are being considered.)

5. (a) What proportion of the total farm population is
poorer than the "small farmer"; that is, what is the
amount and status of landless farm-laboFrrs?

.(b) For this group that is at the bottom of the income
scale, what percentage is employed by "large farmers"
and what percentage by "small farmers"?

(c) To what extent would the lowest income group
be benefited and to what extent bypassed by a "small
farmer" strategy? What ways, if any, might there be
for helping those who would be bypassed?

6. (a) What difficulties have you had in identifying
feasible projects (i.e. projects with a positive benefit/
cost ratio) for small farmers in your country? (Note
that these projects might include such activities as
rural road construction for small farm areas, small
farmer oriented agricultural research, fertilizer
procurement for small farmer cooperatives, or improved
water supply for small farmer production and/or
consumption.)



UNCLASSIFIES
r'Z&,,ATIO&


;3-5-9A (-7Z)





AIRGRAM
CONTINUATION


DEPARTMENT OF STATE


AIRGRAM


Send to List P


Please reproduce attachment as airgram.


UNCLASSIFIED
arAAs8FICATION


KISSINGER
)A~ci~di^i


A10D--39A (9-6W)


PM rMO G*.4


-Ol7 NO. CLASSlFICAtONM PA5 FIW
AIDTO CIRCULAR A 617 UNCLASSIFIED 6 o 6


(b) What effect do you anticipate these newly
identified small farmer projects will have on food
production in the short run? In the long run?

7. What do you consider your major programming constraints?
(Be specific: e.g. USAID technical or analytical manpower,
host country manpower, or data constraints. List these
constraints in order of importance. Explain the way
in which they operate and whether or how they may be
overcome.)

(Some Missions, in partial answer to some of these questions,
may wish to reference documents they have submitted to AID/We
with page numbers, where the relevant information is available.)
Attachment: "Food Production and Equity in Agricultural
Producer Strategies" (1 copy)







CLASSIFICATION


-~ /AY~


AIDED}


ITt? P FOR A.T.D. ATRGRAMS AND Tfri~tRAMn


LIST P


ABIDJAN
ACCRA
ADDIS ABABA
AMMAN
ANKARA
ASUNCIN
BAMAKO
BANGKOK
BOGOTA
BRASILIA
BRIDGETOWN
CAIRO
COLOMBO
CONAKRY
COTONOU
DACCA
DAKAR
DAMASCUS
DAR ES SALAAM
FREETOWN


GEORGETOWN
GUATEMALA
ISLAMABAD
JAKARTA
KABUL
KATHMANDU
KHARTOUM
KINGSTON
KINSHASA
LAGOS
LA PAZ
LIMA
LISBON
MANAGUA
MANILA
MBABANE
MEXICO
MONROVIA
MONTEVIDEO
NAIROBI


5.:NEW DELHI
3 NDJAMENA
3 NIAMEY
2 NICOSIA
2 NOUAKCHOTT
2 OUAGADOUGOU
8 PANAMA
4 PORT AU PRINCE
7 QUITO
5 RABAT
2 SANA
5 SAN JOSE
5 SAN SALVADOR
5 SANTIAGO
5 SANTO DOMINGO
4 SEOUL
5 TEGUCIGALPA
b TUNIS
2 USUN NEW YORK
2 YAOUNDE


CAPTIONS
3 BANGKOK FOR USOM AND RED

3 DAR ES SALAAM FOR SAID AND RDOEA/ARUSHA

4 GUATEMALA FOR SAID AND ROCAP

2 NAIROBI FOR SAID AND REDSO/EA



CLASSIFICATION

6b POSTS (64 & 278 CYS WITH CAPTIONS)


6/13/75


FND TO :


,TTT P Fn. A.T.b -- I R A TLGA -b Ta .


/-'30


' I




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs