Across fragile states in Africa, conflict and other protracted crises as well as increasing climate stresses are compounding smallholder farmers’ challenges of accessing and using sufficient amounts of high quality, affordable and diversified seed of locally adapted varieties that farmers prefer. The result is lower resilience to continued shocks and stresses, lower farm income, reduced food and nutrition security and commonly, the unsustainable use of agrobiodiversity.
Seed sectors in fragile and conflict-affected states (FCS) are regularly fragmented and dysfunctional; unable to meet seed demand due to weakened institutional capacities, governance breakdown and market disruption. Yet timely delivered and affordable quality seed is a key input for increasing crop productivity, and experts generally estimate that 50% of the yield gap can be closed through the use of quality seed.
In FCS contexts, multiple actors respond to different challenges and priorities – humanitarian responders strive to meet immediate needs, often following an emergency; development practitioners focus on strengthening resilience and food security; and peace-building actors focus on improving social cohesion amongst divergent groups and addressing the root causes of the conflict.
In these contexts, seed interventions are often a part of humanitarian and development responses; seed is a critical component of the overall agricultural system and can yield quick returns for farmers, including for men, women and the most vulnerable. However, there is often a disconnect between the approaches Humanitarian-Development-Peacebuilding (HDP) actors take, and lack of experiences of nexus coordination, particularly in FCS.
Humanitarian interventions often weaken seed sectors in the long-term through the displacement of private sector actors, market flooding of inexpensive or free seeds, or bulk purchases of crops or seeds not suitable for the climate or environment. To avoid these pitfalls, consensus is needed amongst humanitarian and development actors and policy makers on what elements make seed sector interventions effective in conflict contexts, and how these interventions might contribute to longer- term peace outcomes.
For effective seed response, HDP-Nexus actors must understand the complexities of conflict contexts and adapt their interventions to the unique challenges and opportunities inherent therein. HDP-Nexus actors need to agree upon and adopt principles or standards for appropriate seed responses that are timely, targeted, coordinated and that build upon and improve existing systems as well as governance and institutional arrangements, being formal or informal. This is especially critical in shock-prone areas, where needs switch frequently between emergency and development interventions; in these locations emergency interventions need to be linked to and support longer-term seed sector development ambitions.
Resilience to climate shocks and stresses
Particularly in the Horn of Africa and West Africa, erratic and less predictable rainfall, higher temperatures, heat spells, and recurring droughts are predicted to become more frequent. This is leading to a change of cropping seasons and growing cycles and occurrence of new pests and diseases. As a result of these irregularities and uncertainties, farmers can no longer rely on crops and crop varieties that used to do well, with negative impacts on nutrition and food security and the capacity of farmers to withstand shocks.
Climate change impacts are exacerbating the devastating impact of conflict and war, resulting in loss of lives, destruction of goods and livelihoods, and massive displacement of people inside countries and across borders.
Farmer communities in protracted crisis situations are particularly vulnerable because they do not have resilient seed sectors that provide affordable, diverse and good quality seed/seedlings of staple crops, minor crops, vegetables, and forage species (important for feeding their livestock) in a timely manner. They also have difficulties accessing suitable farm inputs, such as agronomic knowledge, fertilizers, tools; creating income generation options (e.g., sale of fresh or processed produce); and finding efficient marketing channels.
External interventions, as organized by development and humanitarian agencies, do not always sustainably respond to farmer and community needs or interests; an example is supply of emergency seed of varieties that are not adapted or fail to germinate in particular local agroecological conditions.
Improving seed aid practice
Seed interventions are a particular focus of humanitarian aid, as seed is relatively easy for farmers to use and can give quick returns. While good seed aid can bolster farming systems, poor seed aid can increase farmers’ vulnerability. For instance, seed that arrives too late or poorly adapted seed wastes farmers’ land and labor resources. Also, aid repeated over multiple seasons breeds farmer dependency and stifles the development of commercial seed enterprises.
Through ISSD Africa, Mercy Corps and SeedSystem have developed 10 Guiding Principles for Good Seed Aid Practice. The Principles will guide practitioners to ensure their interventions support local seed systems and markets and give farming communities the right support, at the right time.
Building on the achievements of ISSD Africa’s previous phase
The previous phase of ISSD Africa (2019-2023) produced many new insights and guiding perspectives, compiled and endorsed by ISSD Africa and partner initiatives in the 3rd Communique on ISSD in Africa and it’s eight accompanying briefs. The Communique gives impetus for enhanced cooperation with the African Seed and Biotechnology Partnership Platform of the African Union and promotes modalities for increased engagement with policy-makers, regulators and local-level institutions around five key themes.
Especially in relation to the HDP-Nexus focus of this new phase, under the previous topics of ‘Developing the seed sector in fragile states’ and ‘Effective seed insecurity response’ and ‘Agrobiodiversity, seeds and climate change’ multiple new tools, case studies, reviews and other knowledge products were developed which will be used and further refined and scaled in this new phase.