The problem of food scarcity is of a complex character. Food supplies are particularly vulnerable, as they depend on a number of factors. That’s why in order to address this problem we should also address the aspects of economic growth, poverty, health and education, and their effect on food scarcity. In this paper we will discuss the following questions:
- Does population growth trigger economic growth and development in agriculture based countries?
- Will larger population create larger demand and facilitate economies of scale?
- Are free markets able to adjust to scarcities created by population issues (such as food scarcity)?
Talking about food scarcity we cannot but discuss food insecurity. Food insecurity incorporates low food intake, variable access to food, economy’s vulnerability.[1] There are three types of food insecurity: chronic (caused by structural factors, such as poverty, government policies, natural resources), cyclical (affected by seasonality of market prices), and transitory (with drought and war as the main triggers).
In Ethiopia, as well as in many other developing countries, food deficit has been a serious issue for decades, at least since 1980s. According to the government report from 1996, “The current situation is therefore one of food abundance co-existing with widespread food insecurity.[2]” Today the country faces the same problems that caused disasters (famine) and economic stagnation (drought) as one season of drought pulls the whole economy backwards and depreciates the economic growth achieved in the previous years.
Ethiopia’s poverty-stricken economy is based on agriculture, accounting for almost half of GDP, 60% of exports, and 80% of total employment. The agricultural sector suffers from frequent drought and poor cultivation practices. Coffee is critical to the Ethiopian economy with exports of some $350 million in 2006[3], but historically low prices have seen many farmers switching to qat to supplement income. The war with Eritrea in 1998-2000 and recurrent drought have buffeted the economy, in particular coffee production. In November 2001, Ethiopia qualified for debt relief from the Highly Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) initiative, and in December 2005 the IMF voted to forgive Ethiopia’s debt to the body. Under Ethiopia’s constitution, the state owns all land and provides long-term leases to the tenants; the system continues to hamper growth in the industrial sector as entrepreneurs are unable to use land as collateral for loans. Drought struck again late in 2002, leading to a 3.3% decline in GDP in 2003. Normal weather patterns helped agricultural and GDP growth recover during 2004-08.
Population growth reduces landholdings and puts enormous pressure on fragile[4] natural resources. One of the contributing problems is the condition of soil: its fertility is low due to intensive cultivation and absence of yield-enhancing inputs. Droughts decrease the productivity of already low yields. Employment opportunities outside the agricultural sector and the chances of its diversification are extremely low. The same can be said about opportunities – very limited. Thus, people find themselves trapped in a fragile and unviable environment with low agricultural output. This is particularly important as agriculture is the main source of income in Ethiopia: exports and employment.
In order to take a more comprehensive look at factors that create the seemingly hopeless state of economic system sustained by food aid, we distinguish between micro and macro dimensions of food scarcity.
MICRO DIMENSION OF FOOD SCARCITY
Landholding shrank over three decades, from 0.28 ha p.c. in 1960 to 0.10 ha in 1990.[5] The food output per capita also decreased from 240.2 kg till 141.7 respectively.[6]
[ Figure 1 ]
Famine conditions have emerged in several parts of the country, due to drought which has caused heavy crop and livestock losses. In the pastoral areas of the east and south, which have had three consecutive years of little or no rainfall, large numbers of livestock have perished and a number of starvation related deaths, particularly among children, are being reported. People have started migrating en masse to towns and feeding centres in search of water and food. In the country as a whole, more than 8 million people, including 400 000 displaced by the border war with Eritrea, are facing severe food shortages.
With bleak prospects for the 2000 secondary “Belg” crop, to be harvested from May, the number of people in need of food assistance could increase to more than 9 million. The Belg crop accounts for around 8 to 10 percent of annual cereal and pulse production but in some northern parts it provides a major part of annual grain production. The failure of last year’s Belg season and persistent drought through the 1999 main “Meher” season severely affected the food security of a large number of people.
Cereal import requirements in 2000 estimated by FAO and WFP at 764 000 tonnes in January are likely to substantially increase following the poor belg season rains so far.
[Table 1]
| agriculture | industry | services | ||
| GDP composition | 45.9% | 12.9% | 41.2% | |
| Labour force | 80.2% | 6.6% | 13.2% |
MALTHUSIAN APPROACH. INTERMINABLE POPULATION GROWTH
Population growth is generally considered to be the principal cause of poverty, low living standards, malnutrition, food scarcity, poor health, exhaustion of resources, and other social problems. In case of Ethiopia the projections of population growth indicate a huge increase in population size both in the past (from 1950 to 2000) and future estimates (up to either 2050 or 2300).
It looks very similar to the Malthusian predictions of enormous populations that outsize the resources available to them. However, the economic and demographic situation in developing countries like Ethiopia is more complex. According to N. Alexandratos, “there is a clear need for integrating the analytical assumptions underlying the demographic projections with further variables…”[7]
[Figure 2]
HUMAN CAPITAL: MICROECONOMIC HOUSEHOLD THEORY OF FERTILITY
Food insecurity in Ethiopia is both a cause and a result of low human capital based on poor education, poor nutrition/malnutrition and low labour productivity. Naturally, all these adversities root in the poverty-stricken countries, Ethiopia being one of them.
Parents determine the number of children as a way to maximize their utility. Children are, thus, viewed as an investment. The number of children in a family, i.e. demand for children, has several determinants:
- Family/household preferences for the number of (usually male) children;
- Direct costs of rearing a child;
- “Opportunity cost” or “missed income effect”;
- Parent’s income.
[Figure 3]
The correlation between poverty, malnutrition and market failure is well-grounded. Better fed people can contribute longer to economic growth, raising the country’s GDP. They are more likely to have healthier children, which creates human capital based on education, instead of higher fertility rates, as healthy children obtain better learning skills, unlike those who suffer from undernourishment or hunger. Labour productivity is influenced by malnutrition at early ages. That leads to stunted growth, which in its turn leads to lower earnings.[8] In other words, with large families the population rapidly increases, reducing investments, causing a drop in GDP, increasing poverty, and again, making families choose in favour of human capital quality, rather than quantity.
However, another reason for lower earnings is that a poor and malnourished child is not considered to be a “good investment”. We can assume that even having relatively healthy children, parents, being unsure about their daily bread, would prefer their children to work instead of studying. And in this case, healthy-born children, i.e. with higher birth weights, have more chance to survive and contribute to family supporting activities.
[Box 1]
| - Seventy-five percent of the world’s poor people live in rural areas: an estimated 900 million people at the $1-a-day poverty level. A majority are in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia - Most of the world’s poor people depend directly or indirectly on agriculture for their livelihoods
- In Africa, demand for food is expected to reach $100 billion by 2015, double its level of 2000 - Sub-Saharan Africa is the only region where yields of food crops have declined, and farmers get only one-third of the yields achieved by Asian farmers - A majority of farmers in Sub-Saharan Africa are women. |
The majority of farmers are women, and the percent of women literacy is only 39% under the age of 15 and 23% among adult women.
We talk about food insecurity not only when the food consumption is low, but first of all when access to food is variable over time (year, or even season).[9]
Sustained growth that reduces rural poverty will require that more countries achieve 5 percent annual growth in agricultural value added. While growth in agricultural value added has been strong since 2000, averaging 4.6 percent in 2004, too little of it has come from higher productivity or yields. While land productivity is increasing in 38 of 46 countries, only 6 have a rate of increase of 5 percent or more. Labor productivity is increasing in 29 countries, with 10 achieving increases of 3 percent a year or higher.[10]
MACRO DIMENSION OF FOOD SCARCITY
Food aid has become a usual response to Ethiopia’s chronic food scarcity. In Ethiopia food production per capita was steadily declining from 1970 till 2000.
[Figure 4]
Many sources blame the continuing population growth on food aid to Ethiopia. In 1900 Ethiopia’s population is estimated to have been 5 million, it is presently about 70 million and is projected to be about 170 million by 2050. Food aid soared after 1984 “Life Aid”: with the participation of a number of famous persons when a lot of attention was driven to the hunger in Ethiopia. According to the data below, the country received the food aid every time it experienced food scarcity, which justifies our assumption that food aid is used as a “painkiller” instead of solving the problem of chronic food insecurity.
[Figure 5]
In terms of a theoretical framework for the issue of food scarcity we consider the theory of demographic entrapment introduced by Maurice King in 1980s. According to King[11], a population is described as demographically entrapped if it is exceeding:
(i) the carrying capacity of its own ecosystem, and
(ii) its ability to obtain products, food in particular, from others, except as food aid, and
(iii) its ability to migrate to other ecosystems in a manner which preserves or improves its standard of living.
The process described above occurs when the demographic transition from developing to developed countries fails. Ethiopia is only one of the numerous countries that encounters such underdevelopment. 80% of all the countries in the world that experience the highest population growth rates are less developed regions.
When population exceeds carrying capacity of its own ecosystem it creates a disorder of demographic transition which presents serious ethical problems in that it causes a conflict between the interests of the child and the community. Aid Agencies do not usually recognize the existence of entrapment. The end result is that people die where they are, migrate in misery to an urban slum (forced migration), or hope to be supported indefinitely by food aid.
Demographic entrapment causes further threats to the population and its ability to build economies of scale. As high fertility commonly leads to only high fertility, the country is trapped in a continuing population growth.
Poverty is a condition in which sundry variables are linked to one, such that the possession of one makes the possession of the others more likely. These variables include, low-income, unemployment, high fertility (many children), lack of education, bad health, bad housing, and lack of opportunity, etc.[12]
Poverty trap[13] is the term for the several mechanisms which make it difficult for poor to escape from their poverty. For example, the poor, being poor, are less able to get a good education and therefore a good job, which would enable them to escape from poverty.
- The economic trap is the creation, deliberately or otherwise, of the economic conditions, from which there is no easy escape. As such, it might perhaps be seen as component (c) of demographic entrapment.
Carrying capacity is typically defined as the maximum population size that can be supported indefinitely by a given environment, but there are at least 10 different specific definitions used in basic and applied ecology.[14] The concept originated in applied ecology with a focus on maximizing production of cattle on rangeland, and independently evolved in basic ecology associated with the logistic population growth model. Further definitions in basic ecology include (1) the equilibrial population size or density where the birth rate equals the death rate, (2) a long-term average population size that is stable through time (regardless of varying demographic rates), and (3) population size constrained by whatever resource is in the shortest supply, in accordance with the law of the minimum. Additional definitions in applied ecology include maximum sustainable yield, maximum economic yield, and the open-access equilibrium. In both basic and applied ecology, carrying capacity has proven difficult to parametrize and measure, rendering the concept to be most useful as a heuristic and theoretical tool. Nonetheless, it is a fundamental truth that no population can grow without limit, which is especially important given that many human societies have behaved as if no limits exist.
Carrying capacity for man[15], in a community of subsistence farmers, the maximum number of people that an a hectare of land can support sustainably in an average year, at the current level of technology, and at a specified standard of living. It does not include those supported by external trade or aid. The continuing need for food aid is a good indication of entrapment. Population and food aid in Ethiopia. In 1900 Ethiopia’s population is estimated to have been 5 million, it is presently about 70 million and is projected to be about 170 million by 2050.
Ethiopia’s poverty-stricken economy is based on agriculture, accounting for almost half of GDP, 60% of exports, and 80% of total employment. The agricultural sector suffers from frequent drought and poor cultivation practices. Coffee is critical to the Ethiopian economy with exports of some $350 million in 2006, but historically low prices have seen many farmers switching to qat to supplement income. The war with Eritrea in 1998-2000 and recurrent drought have buffeted the economy, in particular coffee production. In November 2001, Ethiopia qualified for debt relief from the Highly Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) initiative, and in December 2005 the IMF voted to forgive Ethiopia’s debt to the body. Under Ethiopia’s constitution, the state owns all land and provides long-term leases to the tenants; the system continues to hamper growth in the industrial sector as entrepreneurs are unable to use land as collateral for loans. Drought struck again late in 2002, leading to a 3.3% decline in GDP in 2003. Normal weather patterns helped agricultural and GDP growth recover during 2004-08.
During the famine of the 1980s, rainfall was well below average and growth plunged. Whether rainfall is an accurate indicator of GDP growth is another matter, however. This chart from the United Nations appears to show changes in GDP growth preceding similar changes in rainfall in certain years.
Ethiopia’s demand for grain continued to increase because of population pressures, while supply remained short, largely because of drought and government agricultural policies, such as price controls, which adversely affected crop production. Food production had consistently declined throughout the 1980s. Consequently, Ethiopia became a net importer of grain worth about 243 million birr annually from l983/84 to l987/88. The food deficit estimate for the l985/89 period indicated that production averaged about 6 million tons while demand reached about 10 million tons, thus creating an annual deficit of roughly 4 million tons. Much of the food deficit was covered through food aid. Between l984/85 and l986/87, at the height of the drought, Ethiopia received more than l.7 million tons of grain, about l4 percent of the total food aid for Africa. In addition, Ethiopia spent 341 million birr on food purchases during the l985-87 period.
IMPLICATIONS FOR DEVELOPMENT AND ECONOMIC GROWTH
In the last half-century, population growth has proceeded at an unprecedented rate, with the world’s population currently totaling six billion people. The public health impact of this growth has been tremendous, and the implications for the future are equally daunting. Trends in fertility and mortality rates offer insight into the health and development challenges posed by population growth, and the possible demographic scenarios of the future. Still, future scenarios will be largely determined by a number of controllable factors, including contraceptive prevalence, HIV/AIDS and other diseases, gender equity, migration patterns, and government policies. Considering population’s heavy impact on service and resource availability, population growth will remain a critical determinant of global public health.
Developing countries are more at risk from climate change because of their dependence on agriculture, especially the subsistence sort with poor irrigation. Climate variability has a more severe impact on the economies in which agriculture is a large share of GDP. In Ethiopia, around 75% of the population is dependent on farming, which is almost entirely small-scale and rain-fed. A further 10% earn their living from livestock.
Population growth reduces landholdings and puts enormous pressure on fragile[16] natural resources. One of the contributing problems is the condition of soil: its fertility is low due to intensive cultivation and absence of yield-enhancing inputs. Droughts decrease the productivity of already low yields. Employment opportunities outside the agricultural sector and the chances of its diversification are extremely low. The same can be said about opportunities – very limited. Thus, people find themselves trapped in a fragile and unviable environment with low agricultural output. This is particularly important as agriculture is the main source of income in Ethiopia: exports and employment.
[1] Stephen Devereux, Food Insecurity in Ethiopia, October 2000. p.1.
[2] MEDAC 1996
[3] The World Factbook, CIA, https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/
[4] the resources are considered to be fragile (not scarce) because there are many obstacles that make their utility impossible (transport system, dependence on climate changes, etc.).
[5] Befekadu and Berhanu, Annual Report on Ethiopian Economy, 1999/2000
[6] Ibidem
[7] Nikos Alexandratos, Countries with Rapid Population Growth and Resource Constraints: Issues of Food, Agriculture, and Development. Population and Development Review 31(2): 237-258, June 2005. p. 242
[8] 1% increase in height is associated with salary increase of 2-2.4%, according to Brazilian studies. (The Economist, Feeding the hungry. May 6, 2004)
[9] Stepthen Devereux, p. 3
[10] The World Bank, Africa Development Indicators, 2007, p.7
[11] King, M. Demographic entrapment. Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 87, Supplement 1, 1993, pp. 23-28
[12] http://www.leeds.ac.uk/demographic-disentrapment/aaaThe%20definition%20and%20the%20escapes%20end.htm
[13] Ibidem
[14] M.A. Hixon, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR, USA Encyclopedia of Ecology Pages 528-530
[15] http://www.leeds.ac.uk/demographic-disentrapment/aaaCarrying%20capacity.htm
[16] the resources are considered to be fragile (not scarce) because there are many obstacles that make their utility impossible (transport system, dependence on climate changes, etc.).
