REVIEWOFBUDGETINGANDFUNDINGOFTHEAGRICULTURESECTORINNIGERIA19702010 By DavidAdama 5EsighiStreet,OffBateba,Calabar,CrossRiverState alpharojajunior@yahoo.com ExecutiveSummary Thedenialoftherighttofoodcompromisespeoplesabilityandcapacitytoachieveallother rights.

hts. To fight the scourge of hunger we must address its causes rather than alleviate its symptoms. In spite of the growing importance and reliance on oil, Nigeria has remained essentially an agrarian economy accounting for significant shares in the Nations Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and total exports as well as employing the bulk of the labour force. Available statistics showed that prior to Nigerias independence in 1960, agriculture contributed substantially to the GDP which was about 60%, usual for developing countries. However, as the year goes by, agricultures contribution to the GDP fell to only about 25% between 1975 and 1979, this was attributed to the growth of the mining and manufacturing sectors.AsNigeriasGDPratedeclined,soalsowasthegrowthrateforagriculturalproduction. The Agriculture sector has had several policy documents which had highlighted government position and commitment to funding and implementing sustainable agriculture. Of all the severalpoliciesofgovernmentTheaswellbutofnoteandcommendationistheNationalFood Security Programme which was developed three years ago with ample policy direction and fundingexpectationsthoughwithoutfigures. Fundingfortheagriculturalsectorhasnotbeenwithinaparticularbudgetarytrendbasedon data available which is worrisome. Data from 1960 to 2001 showed that the Federal Government of Nigeria implemented the incremental1 budget system of which budgetary figures were simply added to the previous budget irrespective of the programmes being undertaken. One therefore takes for granted that every ministry of government will benefit fromthislarges.Thiswasnotthecasewiththeagricultureandwaterresourcesweretheir budgetaryallocationsfluctuatedlikepowersupplywithoutaclearbasisforthisfluctuations. Until2001,AgricultureandWaterResourceshadtheirvariousbudgetheadbeforebothwere merged to form what we have today as Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Water Resource(FMAWR). I would assume the merger was for effective coordination and administrativeconvenienceratherthanoperationalconvenienceasitshowsthattheindividual ministries prior to 2001 enjoyed better budgetary allocation as compared to what transpires todayasindividualentities.

Incrementalbudgetingwhichwasbasedonpreviousallocationandutilizationofbudgetaryallocationwas operationalbytheFederalandStatesgovernmentinNigeriapriorto2004whentheMediumTermExpenditure Framework(MTEF)wasadopted.

1

 Nigerias budgetary allocation and utilization has risen over 3,600% between 1990 and 2010. The budget has grown nominally over the years but in real terms, there has not been real growthbecauseofinflationandvalueformoneyexpenditure.Withintheperiodunderreview, agriculturehashaditsfairshareofthebudgetaryallocation.Inthelast10yearsofdemocracy, thesectorsbudgethasgrownby475%whichmayhoweveronlybenominalgrowthratherthan realvaluegrowth. Despite the over 3,600% increase in budgetary allocation between 1990 and 2010, there are stilllargefundinggapswhichneedtobeaddressedtoeffectivelyimplementthemanypolicies and blue print that various governments have developed. Like every other sector in Nigeria, Agriculturalfundinghasbeendictatedbytheinterestandagendaofthegovernmentinpower. Nigeria has experienced a great number of agricultural policy documents which has equalled thenumberofadministrationsthecountryhashad.Almostalltheregimeshavecomeupwith oneagriculturalpolicyortheotheryettheyarenotsufficientlyfunded.Thequestiontherefore ariseswhywerethesepoliciesdeveloped? Inmostcases,thesepoliciesdevelopedbythesamegovernmentshavenotbeenimplemented to the later based on poor and inadequate budgetary allocation as evidence in the annual budgetaryallocation.Theevidentdearthoffundingtotheagriculturalsectorisagelongandas oldasindependence.Despitetheinadequatebudgetaryallocationtothevarioussectors,the issueofabsorptivecapacityoftheMDAshasremainedamajorissue. ThisstudythereforeisareviewofFederalGovernmentofNigeriasbudgetingandfundingof governmentprogrammesvisavisagricultureexpenditurebetween20002010. The table below shows Nigerias budgetaryallocation and expenditure pattern in the last ten years. Table1.SummaryofFederalGovernmentExpenditure20002009(=N='Million)2 Year RecurrentExpenditure CapitalExpenditure Total 2000 461,600.00 239,450.90 701,050.90 2001 579,300.00 438,698.50 1,017,998.50 2002 698,800.00 321,378.10 1,020,178.10 2003 984,300.00 241,688.30 1,225,988.30 2004 1,032,700.00 351,300.00 1,384,000.00
2

Thisexcludesinterestpaymentsondebtservice,othertransfersandextra

budgetaryitemsandcapitalrepaymentondebtservices,othertransfersandnet landing

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 20103

1,223,700.00 1,290,201.90 1,589,270.00 2,117,400.00 1,964,267.00 3,310,343.38

519,500.00 552,385.80 759,323.00 960,900.00 562,373.1 883,874.50

1,743,200.00 1,842,587.70 2,348,593.00 3,078,300.00 2,526,640.10 4,194,217.88

Source:CBNStatisticalBulletin(2003,2007,2009and2010),BudgetOfficeoftheFederation; BudgetPerformanceReport(2009)
2500000 2000000 (=N=Millions) 1500000 Year 1000000 500000 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 SummaryofFGNbudgetexpenditure20002009 RecurrentExpenditure CapitalExpenditure

The attendant nominal growth of the Federal budget has however not being realistic and programme oriented with the annual increases addressing only recurrent expenditure. It thereforeputtotheforetheimportancegovernmentplacesonissuesthataffectthepoorand in many cases smallholder farmers. Analysis of several fiscal management reports shows that theincreasehasnotbeendeliberateneitherhasittargetedsectorsthatcontributetopoverty reduction and wealth creation. Within the period under review (20002010), recurrent expenditurehasincreasedbyover475.6%whilecapitalexpenditurehasincreasedby234.9%of thetotalbudgetsizeforthefiscalyears20002010creatingaratioof2:1. Starting from colonial to post colonial Nigeria, several agricultural policies documents have beendevelopedbysuccessivegovernment.Despitethenobilityoftheseagricultural(policies) programmes,onlypartsoftheseplanshavebeenimplementedduetoinadequatefundingof the plans. Analyses of budgetary documents have shown that the funding gap for this sector
3

Thisincludesinterestpaymentsondebtservice,othertransfersandextra

budgetaryitemsandcapitalrepaymentondebtservices,othertransfersandnet landing

datesbacktothe1958whenpetroleumwasdiscoveredincommercialquantity.Thetrendhas howeverchangedwithinthelast10yearswithagrowthrateofover475%between2000and 2010. Percentageanalysisofagriculturalspendingshowsthatbudgetaryallocationandutilisationin thesectorfluctuatesupwardanddownwardbuthasneverreachedtheminimuminvestment requirement of at least 10% set by the heads of government of Africa. Records were not available to review 2007, 2008, and recurrent for 2009. However, 2009 utilization is commendable and feet should be maintained. The data above shows that agriculture budget expenditurehasactuallygrownwithinthelastthreeyearsabove200%andalsoimprovement ofbudgetimplementationperformanceto83%. Howeverthereisaseriousconcernwithagriculturebudgetbasedonitconstantfluctuationsin budgetaryallocation.Itisthereforeimperativethatthemuchtalkaboutfightingpovertyand hungercanonlybewonandsustainedifadequatebudgetaryprovisionsaremadeandutilized withintheComprehensiveAfricaAgricultureProgramme(CAADP) 1.0Introduction Thedenialoftherighttofoodcompromisespeoplesabilityandcapacitytoachieveallother rights. To fight the scourge of hunger we must address its causes rather than alleviate its symptoms. In spite of the growing importance and reliance on oil, Nigeria has remained essentially an agrarian economy accounting for significant shares in the Nations Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and total exports as well as employing the bulk of the labour force. Available statistics showed that prior to Nigerias independence in 1960, agriculture contributed substantially to the GDP which was about 60%, usual for developing countries. However, as the year goes by, agricultures contribution to the GDP fell to only about 25% between 1975 and 1979, this was attributed to the growth of the mining and manufacturing sectors.AstheGDPratedeclined,sowasthegrowthrateforagriculturalproduction. InNigeria,budgetaryallocationtosectorsandMDAsaregenerallynotbasedontheimportance ofthesectorstothenationseconomyneitheritscontributiontotheGrossDomesticProduct (GDP).RathertheyarebasedontheabilityoftheMinistry(Minister)tonegotiate,lobbyand fightitscasewiththelegislature.ThisisevidenceinthebriberycasewhichinvolvedtheFederal Ministry of Education paying over fifty million naira to the legislature to allow the ministrys budget scale through without been cut down and a similar scenario reported by one time MinisterofFederalCapitalTerritoryin20054. According to the 2007 report on poverty National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) Nigeria has a population of 72 million people living below the $1 mark a day with the several arable lands

FabianOsuji,OnetimeEducationMinisterwhowastriedalongside6othersforbribestomembersofthe parliamenttothetuneof$400,000toensureeasypassageofhisbudgetnottheinterestofeducational development.

4

availabletothepeopletofarmandmakeendsmeet.ThetargetoftheUnitedNationsthrough MDG goal 1 is to halve extreme poverty and hunger by 2015 of which Nigeria is a signatory. Achieving goal 1 of the MDGs by 2015 is a tall order which therefore presupposes that governmentbudgetaryallocationtosectorsthatwillcontributetotheachievementofthisgoal willbeadequatelyfunded.ThisisrathernotthecasewithmanycountriesincludingNigeria. Generally in Nigeria, there is a notion by most MDAs that no sector is adequately funded no matterthebudgetaryallocationforthatparticularyear.Thecountrysbudgethasincreasingly increased from billions of naira to trillions of naira. How has the continued increase of the budget yearin year out affected the common person in the street visavis their economy? Between 1990 and 2009, Federal Government budgetary expenditure has grown from 701 millionnairato2,526trillionnairawithover3,600%increase. In the developed countries, budgetary allocation is dependent on the policy position of that administration or government. Linking policy planning, development and funding in Nigeria wouldnotbeoutofperspective.Comparativelythelastthreeyearshasseenlinkagesbetween policy position and budgetary allocation however effective implementation of this allocations remainsachallenge.Justlikeinthepreandpostcolonialera,severalagriculturaldocuments weredeveloped.Withinthelast10years,Nigeriahasdeveloped2majorpolicydocumentsthat gave direction to government funding pattern. These documents includes the National EconomicEmpowermentandDevelopmentStrategy(NEEDS1&2)5,andVision20:20206.These documents supposedly dictate a roadmap and funding parameters for most of the sectors of whichagricultureisnotleftout.BothNEEDS1&2andtheVision20:2020documentsidentified agriculture as a key driver of growth, wealth creation and poverty reduction. However the budgetaryprovisiontoagricultureandwaterresourcesasadriverofgrowth,wealthcreation and poverty reduction within the operational period of these documents are far from being realised. 2.0Budgettotheagriculturesector(colonial,postcolonial,2000s) The Agricultural sector remains the largest nonoil contributor to the Nigerian economy, accountingforover38%offoreignexchangeearnings,andemployingover60%oftheactive forceofthecitizen(FMA&WR,NationalFoodSecurityProgramme2008). The precolonial economy strivedbasically on agricultureas the main stay. Based on the non formalandadhocnatureofthesector,colonialandearlypostcolonialbudgetingandfunding of the agriculture sector was more focused on research rather than production of services. underscoring the first Nigeria development plan in the funding of the agricultural sector, the plan emphasized the introduction of more modern agricultural methods through farm

NEEDSwasNigeriasNationalEconomicEmpowermentDevelopmentStrategywhichwasdesignedbythethen ObasanjoAdministrationasthestrategicguideforeconomicandsocialdevelopmentinNigeria. Thevision20:2020policywasoriginallyarticulatedduringtheOlusegunObasanjoadministration(19992007)to makeNigeriaoneofthetwentylargesteconomiesintheworldbytheyear2020.Vision2020economic transformationVision2020drewitsoriginfromNigerianEconomicEmpowermentandDevelopmentStrategy (NEEDSI&II)andthesevenpointagendaofPresidentUmarYarAduda.

6 5

Year 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996

settlements, cooperative (nucleus) plantations, supply of improved farm implements (e.g. hydraulichandpressesforoilpalm processing)andagreatlyexpandedagriculturalextension service. Some of the specialized development schemes initiated or implemented during this period included: Farm Settlement Schemes; and National Accelerated Food Production Programme(NAFPP),launchedin1972.Therewerealsoanumberofagriculturaldevelopment intervention experiments, notably Operation Feed the Nation, launched in 1976; River Basin and Rural Development Authorities, established in 1976; Green Revolution Programme, inaugurated in 1980; and The World Bankfunded Agricultural Development Projects (ADP). While each of the above programmes sought to improve food production, the ADPs represented the major practical demonstration of the integrated approach to agricultural developmentinNigeria. Despite the nobility of these agricultural programmes, only parts of these plans have been implementedduetoinadequatefundingoftheplans.Analysesofbudgetarydocumentshave shown that the funding gap for this sector dates back to the 1958 when petroleum was discovered in commercial quantity. The trend has however changed within the last 10 years withanominalbudgetgrowthrateofover475%between2000and2010. Table2:SummaryofAgricultureBudgetsandExpenditures19772010(=N=Millions) %tototal RecurrentExpenditure CapitalExpenditure Total budget 0.81 19.5 105.5 125 1.2 19.2 128.4 147.6 4.2 34.3 321.9 356.2 1.7 32.5 435.1 467.6 7.0 33.9 775.1 809 8.3 34.1 1,035.10 1,069.20 10.0 29.3 1,185.20 1,214.50 1.7 32.8 252.5 285.3 8.5 32.7 985.4 1,018.1 8.3 32.9 892.5 925.4 0.02 29.2 365.1 394.3 4.54 54.3 595.7 650 3.9 81.1 981.5 1,062.6 5.4 208.1 1,758.50 1,966.60 1.9 121.1 551.2 672.30 1.7 161.5 763 924.5 2.5 1,015.30 1,820.00 2,835.30 3.3 919.0 2,800.10 3,719.10 4.5 2,236.00 4,691.70 6,927.70 2.9 3,892.80 5,574.00

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1,681.20 2.8 1,682.20 6,247.40 7,929.60 2.4 2,963.80 8,876.60 8,876.60 0.15 31,347.20 6,912.60 561.90 0.11 4,834.70 5,761.70 751.40 6.3 7,064.90 57,879 64,943.90 0.36 12,439.40 32,364.40 4,313.60 1.3 7,534.30 8,510.90 16,045.2 4.5 11,725.6 48,047.8 59,773.4 10,858.8 5.0 79,939.4 90,798.2 18,739.8 1.7 15,176.8 33,916.6 NA NA NA NA NA NA 115,954.30 NA NA Source: CBN statistical bulletin, volume 14, Budget office of the Federation; (2009 Budget Implementationreport) Percentageanalysisofagriculturalspendingshowsthatbudgetaryallocationandutilisationin thesectorfluctuatesupwardanddownwardbuthasneverreachedtherequirementofatleast 10%. Records are not available to review 2007, 2008, and recurrent expenditure for 2009. However, 2009 utilization is commendable and feet should be maintained. The data above showsthatagriculturebudgetexpenditurehasactuallygrownwithinthelastthreeyearsabove 200%andalsoimprovementofbudgetimplementationperformanceto83%. Table3.FederalGovernmentExpenditureonWaterResources19902000(N'Mn) Year RecurrentExpenditure CapitalExpenditure 1990 NA 729.5 NA 1991 561.9 NA 1992 751.4 NA 1993 1,695.30 NA 1994 4,313.60 NA 1995 7,103.30 NA 1996 1,741.20 NA 1997 13,220.30

NA 1998 11,390.80 NA 1999 6,923.90 NA 2000 13,529.90 NA=NotAvailable Duetotheabsenceofdataonrecurrentexpenditure,itwasdifficulttoanalysethepercentage commitmentofwaterresourcestothetotalbudgetfortheyearsinreviewpriortothemerger. Source:CBN,StatisticalBulletinandAnnualReportvolume14,2003

SummaryFGNCapitalExpenditure Capital WaterResources19902000 Expenditure,

14000 12000 AxisTitle 10000 8000 6000 4000 2000 0 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 13,529.90

3.0Agriculturalbudgetperformance(allsubsectors) Analysis of budget performance of the various subsectors within the Federal Ministry of Agriculture(FMA)seemsacumbersometaskinthatdataavailablearesummedintoFMA&WR ratherthanthevariouscomponents.Thisthereforelivesnooptionthantoreviewthegeneral budgetperformancefortheministry. Apart from the challenge of inadequate budgetary allocation to most Federal Government Ministries,DepartmentsandAgencies(MDAs),thereappeartobeamajorconcerninbudget implementation. From documented analysis, it does seem that there is shortage of human capacity(skills)andassuchabsorptivecapacityoftheMDAsislimitedtoevenabsorbthefar cried budgetary allocation to the MDAs. Analysis of the budget performance review has indicatedthatnofewerthan60%ofFederalMDAsareoftenabletoutilizeupto50%oftheir annual budget even when their projects are cash backed. With the growth of the agriculture budgetwithintheperiodunderreview,theagriculturesectorhasremainedundoubtedlyoneof thefewMDAsthathavebeenabletosurpassthe50%markforbudgetimplementation.This doesnotprecludethefactthatbefore2005theagriculturesectordidnotperformbadlyamong theotherMDAsinitsbudgetperformance.AsreportedbytheBudgetOfficeoftheFederation, agriculturebudgetimplementationperformancehasthoughimprovedbetween2006from44% to 83.59% in 2009 putting her amongst the most performed MDAs in the 2009 budget performance review (Table 4). It is commendable to note that FMAWR had the second best

budgetimplementationperformanceafterworksin2009.Thelowbudgetutilizationamongst governmentMDAsisworrisomeasthenonperformanceorbudgetutilizationbysomeofthese MDAs has effect and implications on the performance of others. As reflected by the various budgetaryperformancereport,theFMA&WRisnotandexceptiontothistrend.Reviewingthe improved budgetary implementation performance of the agriculture sector in the last few years,onemayneedtolookatpolicydevelopment,implementationandleadershipstyleand approach.ThepoorbudgetperformanceamongsttheMDAs,thosenothoweverprecludesthe fact that budgetary provisions have been adequate and sufficient. The dearth of data from Budget Office of the Federation has made it however difficult to analyses if truly the sectors budget implementation performance has really improved between 2000 and 2008 as comparedtothereportfor2009. Table4.Budgetperformanceforcapitalexpenditurefor2009amongstselectMDAs MDATotal ReleasesTotal CashBacked TotalUtilization % Utilization Police 21,324,630,000 13,142,984,730 61.63% 21,324,630,000 Formation /Commands 39,599,212,715 39,599,212,715 10,143,106,694 25.61% Power 38,402,031,359 25,902,031,359 22,578,206,651 87.17% Transport 48,643,289,834 48,658,789,834 24,509,417,925 50.37% Health 138,824,895,686 138,724,895,686 115,954,374,024 83.59% Agriculture & 36,386,571,952 36,372,321,952 23,719,577,628 65.21% WaterRes Education 47,302,887,338 47,302,887,338 38,883,477,145 82.20% 209,093,840,018 209,093,840,018 99,382,926,917 47.53% Defence Works 48,000,000,000 48,000,000,000 31,943,273,606 66.55% NigerDelta 60.59%AverageUtilisationbyallMDAs Source:2009BudgetImplementationReport(BudgetOfficeoftheFederation) Compared to other sector under review, the Agriculture sector performed creditably well in terms of expenditure. In 2010, their performance level dropped from 83.59% to 66.91%. no concretepositionhasbeenmadeavailableonthedecline.Undertakingabeneficiaryanalysis, youwillagreethatmostofwhatisprovidedforistosubsidiesbigfarmersintermsoffertilizers

SN

andotherfarminputagainstthebackdropofsmallholderfarmersandinparticularwomen.The other challenge associated with government budgets and expenditure is the fact that it is genderblindandmakesitdifficulttoanalysehowvariousgroupsbenefit. 4.0SpecialInterventionFunds(crop,livestock,fisheries,waterresources,ruraldevelopment, etc) AspartofthegovernmentspolicypositiononNationalFoodSecurity,theSpecialIntervention Fund (SIF) was established to provide funding to augment FGN budgetary provision for the sector. The idea of the special Intervention Fund is that of a joint funding stream from development partners, the World Bank (FADAMA), Islamic Development Bank, African Development Bank, International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), Food and Agricultural Organisation, Debt Relief Gains (MDGs) as well as a part for counterpart or matchinggrantwhichisusuallycapturedintheMDAsallocation. In 2006, the Ministry of Agriculture benefited from the Millennium Development Goals and Debt Relieve Gains allocation to a tune of Nine billion Four hundred million Naira only (N9,400,000,000)outofwhichonlyEightbillionSevenhundredmillionNaira(N8,700,000,000) wasdisbursed.AlsoWaterResourcesgotEighteenbillion,SevenhundredandSixmillion,Nine hundred and Sixty Two thousand Eight hundred and Fifty Five thousand Naira only ( N18,706,962,855).Out ofthetotal allocationfromtheMDGs/DRGsfundforAgriculture,57% (N5,000,000,000)wasexpendedonintegratedruralroads. Reviewing implementation framework for 2009, the government is expending over One hundredandsixtytwobillionnaira(N162,000,000,000)fromtheSpecialinterventionfundand anotherFiftyNinemillionUnitedStateDollars. Table5.SpecialInterventionFund2009 PROGRAMME/PROJECTS SOURCE OF AMOUNT RESPONSIBLE FUND DEPARTMENT/ AGENCY AgricCadastre SIF 4,040,000,000 FDA SoilSurvey SIF 600,000,000 FDA Landclearing SIF 24,000,000,000 FDA IrrigationInfrastructure SIF 16,500,000,000 DID Livestock Breeding and SIF 540,000,000 FDL MultiplicationCentres NationalPestControl SIF 1,500,000,000 FDL AquacultureDevelopment SIF 2,000,000,000 FDL Construction and Completion of SIF 52,000,000,000 NFRA Silos AgroExportConditioningCentres SIF 3,000,000,000 NFRA CassavaProcessing SIF 1,000,000,000 NFRA RiceProcessing SIF 10,000,000,000 NFRA

NationalAbattoirMgtandDevt. FoodandAnimalFeedProduction Dairy&ColdchainDevtProg. GuaranteeMinimumPrice MarketinfrastructureDevt. ResearchandDevlopment

SIF SIF SIF SIF SIF SIF SIF

4,540,000,000 3,500,000,000 2,000,000,000 28,000,000,000 3,570,000,000 6,000,000,000

FADAMAIII IDF Rural Finance Institution Building IDF Prog. Total

USD50M 100,000,000,000& USD9.8M 162,890,000,000 USD59.8M Source:2009Budgetimplementationframework,FMA&WR AnalysisoftheSpecialInterventionFundhasrevealedthatthefundhasmademoreimpacton agriculturefinancingmorethanthetraditionalbudgetbytheministry.Thisisnotfarfromthe fact the partners and donors have reporting requirement and work plans which makes it mandatory for the ministry to report. Analysis also shows that some of this budget heads providedforbysomeofthedonorsordevelopmentpartnersareduplicatedintheMinistryof Agricultures budget as they are not captured in some cases and reported in the ministrys budget. Thisthereforecallsforspecialattentiontothefactthattheprocessformakingthebudgetfor suchsensitivesectorsshouldbemoreparticipatoryandrobust. The other issue associated with the special intervention fund is the tendency to make government shy away from its mandate and responsibility in funding the sector since donors and other development partners are already providing support to the sector. It is therefore necessary for the entire special fund to be appropriately and adequately captured in the Agriculturesectorbudgettoavoidduplicationoffunctionsandwasteofscarceresources. 5.0ChallengestoAgriculturefinancinginNigeria Thegrowthofagriculturalfundingwithinthelasttenyearshasnotbeingwithoutchallenges. Someoftheobstaclesonthewaytoagriculturaldevelopmentincludepolicyandfundingissues aswellasothernaturalissues. The agricultural sector has been beset by several challenges which have greatly affected its growthandcontributiontothenationaleconomy.Manyofthesechallengesinclude; Absenceofeffectiveparticipationoffarmersandbenefittingcommunitiesinagricultural programmes and projects design and implementation. The constant development of agricultural policies excluding the major stakeholders and beneficiaries has had it tool onmanyoftheagriculturalpoliciesasthereislittlebuyinbythevariousgroupsoutside government.

FDL FDL FDL NFRA NFRA ARCN, RIs, FCAs & NASC NFRA NFRA

Poorarticulationandimplementationoflocallyinitiatedprogrammes:Overthelasttwo decades,manyoftheagriculturalpolicieshavebeenborrowedfromothercountriesor development institutions. As such, we have hardly been able to spend time and articulatehomegrowninitiatives,programmesandimplementthemtothelater(NEEDS 1&2). Raw and wrong adoption of external agricultural initiatives: Many of the agricultural policies we have implemented in Nigeria have been developed by bilateral or International Financial Institutions (IFIs) who brought in these programmes based on theirinterestandnottheinterestofthebenefitingstateorgovernment(e.gStructural AdjustmentProgrammeSAP) QuicksuccessionandturnoverofMinister(s)intheministry:InNigeria,itiscommonto seeMinistersstaylesstwoyearswhichislikeaminimumtobeabletomakeevenany policymovementnottotalkofimplementation.Likeeveryothersector,theAgricultural sector has suffered immensely based on frequent change of Ministers. With Nigerias desiretojointhe20largesteconomyby2020,itisimportantthatweallowthesector growthroughappointingrenownedindividualswhocanoneadministrationforeffective policyimplementationinthesector. Poor linkages between sector strategies and budgetary allocation: one of the big problemswithPublicFinanceinNigeriaisthepoorlinkagesbetweensectorstrategyand budgetary allocations. This is evidence in the arbitrary allocation to sectors by Budget OfficeoftheFederationirrespectiveofsectorsprioritytotheNationanditsimportance to the economy. There is no reason why agriculture should lack funding if policy documents and sector strategies are based on in allocating resources. It is therefore imperativethatmeasuresmustbetakentolinkbudgetaryallocationstosectorsstrategy ifmustmakeanydifferenceinthefuture. The absence of finetuning mechanism of macroeconomic and agricultural sector policiestomeettheneedoffarmersandinvestorsintheagriculturalsectorislackingin Nigeria.Despitethemanyagriculturalresearchinstitutionsanduniversity,theministry of agriculture develops it policies documents without inputs from the public. The essenceoftheagriculturaltertiaryinstitutionsissupposedlytofinetunethecrudeideas that may arise in the cause of agricultural design and implementation. Based on our initial statement on borrowing external policies and programmes, it is inevitable to always engage with professionals and these institutions to finetune our policies positionsbasedonempiricalfindingsandevidence. Liberalizationofthemarketthatallowsfoodimport:Thisistheprocessoffreertrade without any restrictions allowing food importation into the country barriers or restrictions.Thisprincipleisbasedonthelogicthatwhenindividualtraderscompeteto sell goods without any restrictions, the consumer is the first person to be benefited.

However,thisideaisdeeplyrootedinthefreemarketcapitalisteconomicsystem,which views citizens as mere consumers and disregards National economies & sovereignty. With technological advancement in the developed and developing countries, it is not difficulttoguesswhowillultimatelybenefitfromtheopeningofthemarket. Inadequate availability of farm inputs to farmers has remained a major challenge to smallscalefarmersinNigeria.Thechallengehasbeenthatofgovernmentnotproviding atallorprovidingforthoseingovernmentwhoareintofarmingleavingthepeoplewho needitthemosttobestrandedtherebyaffectingtheiryieldandproductivity. Absenceofaccesstofarmlandsbysmallscalefarmersandwomen:Womenmakeup themajorityofsmallholderfarmersinmostdevelopingcountries.TheUNsFoodand AgricultureOrganization,(FAO),estimatesthatatleast80%ofruralsmallholderfarmers worldwidearewomen.Despitetheirsignificantroleinagricultureandhouseholdfood security,womenfarmershavenotreceivedthesupporttheyrequiretothrive.Research indicationsshowthatwomenarenotrecognizedasfarmersintheirownrightbytheir ownfamilies,orcommunities,letalonebygovernmentsordonors.Whilethereisalot ofrhetoricthatmentionswomenasthemajorityoffarmers,rhetoriciswhatitremains and the specific needs of these women are overlooked in policy, legislation, research, extensionoranyformofsupportextendedbygovernmentsortheiragencies. Absenceofmicrocreditatlowinterestratebackedbygovernmentguarantyisamajor challengetowhymanysmallscalefarmersoreventhebigtimefarmerscannotaccess approach the banks for credit to finance agricultural development. If farmers are to access agricultural loan from commercial banks, government at the Federal and State levelmustbeabletoguarantytheloanswiththesebanks. 6.0Conclusions ThedevelopmentandgrowthoftheNigerianeconomyremainsundoubtedlydependentonthe growth of the agricultural sector. This sector has great potentials if effectively financed to providemassivejobopportunitiestotheteemingunemployedNigeriansaswellasprovidethe rawmaterialsforindustrialandagriculturaladvancement. The actualization of the Vision 20:2020 can be put back on track if only government will be sinceretofundthecurrentpolicypositionsonagricultureamongstwhichisthecurrentpolicy document on National Food Security Programme. The present National Food Security Programmeaspreparedhasidentifiedtheneedtorevolutionalisecommercialagriculturealong the concept of intensification and the value chain approach. Undoubtedly, this will enhance food production with positive economic chain effects in the area of job and wealth creation acrossthecountry.

Agriculturestillprovidesthemainsourceoflivelihoodfor80to90percentofthepopulationin manycountriesNigeriainclusive.Increasingtheirincomeswillbringruraleconomiesbacktolife andgeneratemorejobsforotherpoorpeopleandincreasedemandfordomesticallyproduced goods and services. Greater numbers of rural jobs and increased incomes generally lead to improved nutrition, better health, and increased investment in education, while increased revenues allow local governments to respond to demands for better infrastructure, such as ruralroads. While addressing the bigger issues across the agricultural sector, investment in smallholder agriculture and women is not only the way to beat hunger, but the best path to economic recoveryandresiliencefordevelopingcountries.