Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Prepared By: Silvester Hwenha, Tshikululu Social Investments
THE SOUTH AFRICAN FOOD
SECURITY PARADOX
Lessons and opportunities for
Corporate Social Investment
i
Executive Summary
The South African Food Security Paradox is the fourth research paper commissioned by FirstRand
Limited as part of its communications campaign to document and share learnings under the theme:
CSI that Works. The overall purpose of the campaign is to influence corporate social investment (CSI)
in South Africa by encouraging knowledge sharing among corporates, civil society organisations,
government and other social development actors.
Research objectives
The overall aim of this research is to highlight the lessons learnt from CSI-funded interventions
designed to alleviate food insecurity in South Africa. The specific objectives of the research are to:
assess the state of food (in)security in urban and rural areas and its implications on business, the
economy and society; review government’s response and interventions to ensure food security in the
country; evaluate current interventions in promoting agriculture, food security and livelihoods; and
identify emerging opportunities for high impact CSI in eliminating food insecurity in the country.
This research is based on the paradox that while South Africa produces adequate food to feed its
population, periodic and chronic food insecurity and hunger at household level still persists for a
significant proportion of the population. Highlighting this paradox is intended to influence stakeholders
to devise food security programmes that will contribute to building a healthier society.
Research methods
The research relied primarily on secondary data and information gathered through an extensive
desktop study, interviews with in-house professionals working on the WesBank Fund Food Security
and Livelihoods Programme (FSALP), and in-depth interviews with project managers in selected
organisations implementing food security programmes. The desktop study was conducted to provide
the background and context of food security in South Africa. The research benefited from WesBank’s
National Partners’ Workshop, which exposed the researcher to various organisations implementing
food security programmes. Through the workshop four food security programmes were identified and
profiled as case studies. The detailed research methodology is shown in Appendix 1.
Research Findings
South Africa produces enough food to feed its population and yet 54% of the population is at risk of
hunger, experience hunger or is food insecure. Food insecurity is prevalent in rural areas (37%) and
urban informal settlements (32%). Hunger is more prevalent among black Africans (30.3%) and the
Coloured population (13.1%). Household vulnerability to food shortages affect children more severely
than adults. About a third of children under the age of five are stunted as a result of malnutrition. The
economic and social costs of malnutrition are very high. Malnutrition renders children susceptible to
diseases and impaired cognitive development. As adults, these children grow up with less education
and are likely to earn less and rely more on government grants as adults.
Despite the high rate of urbanisation, subsistence agriculture remains a livelihood option for many
rural residents, providing them with food and a chance to earn some income. Food gardens in both
rural and urban areas are contributing significantly to household food security. Although mothers and
grandmothers are predominantly involved in food production at micro-level there are still limited
opportunities for women to receive formal training in farming. School feeding programmes are also
giving many children from poor communities an opportunity to access food and simultaneously
acquire an education.
Addressing hunger and food insecurity requires a multi-sectoral approach in order to bring systemic
change. The private sector is already supporting several programmes in food security although there
ii
is still scope to do more. There are opportunities for donors to partner with small-scale farmers on the
food supply chain and assist them with mechanisms to access retail markets. The government has
also made enormous effort to enact various pieces of legislation to address food security, but
challenges still remain. These include: inadequate safety nets; weak support networks and disaster
management systems; inadequate and unstable household food production; lack of purchasing
power; and poor nutritional status.
However, there is consensus that addressing food insecurity requires the collaboration of all
stakeholders; government, civil society and business. Government has in place structures and
frameworks to roll-out national programmes but often the lack the capacity and skills to coordinate
multi-sectoral programmes. Notably, the private sector has the necessary skills to assist government.
Through public-private partnerships there are opportunities to pool resources and expertise, increase
efficiency in implementing programmes aimed at alleviating food insecurity in the country.
The following lessons have been learnt through the implementation of CSI interventions in agriculture
and food security:
Shift funding from food relief programmes to training and skills development interventions
Promote initiatives that promote gender equity in agriculture and the food security sector
Support the design and implementation of educational programmes linked to community
development
Support the use of technology in improving monitoring and evaluation of food security
programmes
Engage in structured public-private partnerships to optimise impact
Support small-scale commercial farmers linked to the business supply chain
iii
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................................................................................................. i Table of Contents ................................................................................................................................................................................................................. iii Acronyms ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 4 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 5
1.1 Hunger in the midst of bounty ................................................................................................. 5 1.2 Research objectives ................................................................................................................ 6 1.3 Scope of the research ............................................................................................................. 6
2. Food Security Perspectives ................................................................................................................................................................................ 6 2.1 Definition of food security ........................................................................................................ 6 2.2 Global food security ................................................................................................................ 7 2.3 The state of food security in South Africa ............................................................................... 7
2.3.1 Food prices and food security ......................................................................................... 9 2.3.2 Food security, malnutrition and health ............................................................................ 9 2.3.3 Rural agriculture ............................................................................................................ 10 2.3.4 Food gardens ................................................................................................................ 11
2.3.4.1 Food gardens in urban areas ................................................................................ 12 2.3.4.2 Food gardens in rural communities ....................................................................... 13
2.3.5 Food security challenges in South Africa ...................................................................... 13 2.3.6 Agricultural training and research ................................................................................. 13
3. National Policy Responses to Food Insecurity ........................................................................................................................................ 15 3.1 National School Nutrition Programme (NSNP) ..................................................................... 16 3.2 The Integrated Nutrition Programme (INP) of 1995 .............................................................. 16 3.3 The Integrated Food Security Strategy (IFSS) of 1996 ........................................................ 17 3.5 The Comprehensive Rural Development Programme (CRDP) of 2009 ............................... 18 3.6 The New Growth Path (NGP) of 2010 .................................................................................. 18 3.7 National Development Plan (NDP) Vision 2030 of 2012 ...................................................... 18 3.8 Food Security Policy of 2012 ................................................................................................ 18
4. Private Sector Responses to Food Security ............................................................................................................................................. 19 4.1 Corporate social investment in food security and agriculture ............................................... 19 4.2 Case studies.......................................................................................................................... 20
4.2.1 Abalimi Bezekhaya – food gardens............................................................................... 20 4.2.1.1 Background ........................................................................................................... 20 4.2.1.2 Programme activities ............................................................................................. 20 4.2.1.3 Programme impact ................................................................................................ 21 4.2.1.4 Lessons learnt ....................................................................................................... 23
4.2.2 In-School Breakfast Feeding Programme – The Tiger Brands Foundation .................. 24 4.2.2.1 Background ........................................................................................................... 24 4.2.2.2 Programme activities ............................................................................................. 24 4.2.2.3 Programme impact ................................................................................................ 25 4.2.2.4 Lessons learnt ....................................................................................................... 26
4.2.3 UNISA Programme in Household Food Security .......................................................... 27 4.2.3.1 Background ........................................................................................................... 27 4.2.3.2 Programme delivery .............................................................................................. 29 4.2.3.3 Programme impact ................................................................................................ 29 4.2.3.4 Lessons learnt ....................................................................................................... 30
4.2.4 Integrated Food Security Programme - Mineworkers Development Agency ................ 31 4.2.4.1 Background ........................................................................................................... 31 4.2.4.2 Programme activities ............................................................................................. 31 4.2.4.3 Programme impact ................................................................................................ 32 4.2.4.4 Lessons learnt ....................................................................................................... 33
5. Discussion and Recommendations ............................................................................................................................................................. 34 5.1 Recommendations ................................................................................................................ 35
Appendix 1: Research approach and methodology ......................................................................................................................................... 37
4
Acronyms
AET Agricultural Education and Training
CAES College of Agriculture and Environmental Science
CASP Comprehensive Agricultural Support Programme
CBO Community Based Organisation
CRDP Comprehensive Rural Development Programme
CSA Community Supported Agriculture
CSI Corporate Social Investment
DAFF Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries
DBE Department of Basic Education
DFI Development Finance Institution of South Africa
DoE Department of Education
DoH Department of Health
DSD Department of Social Development
EDD Economic Development Department
EU European Union
FAO Food and Agriculture Organisation
FET Further Education and Training
FSLP Food Security and Livelihoods Programme
GDP Gross Domestic Product
IFSS Integrated Food Security Strategy
ILUD Integrated Land Use Design
INP Integrated Nutrition Programme
LRAD Land Redistribution for Agricultural Development Programme
LSP Life Skills Programme
MAFISA Micro Agricultural Finance Initiative of South Africa
MDA Mineworkers Development Agency
MDG Millennium Development Goal
MOU Memorandum of Understanding
NDA National Department of Agriculture
NDP National Development Plan
NGO Non-Governmental Organisation
NGP New Growth Path
NSNP National School Nutrition Programme
PHC Primary Health Care
PHFS Programme Household Food Security
PSNP Primary School Nutrition Programme
RDP Reconstruction and Development Programme
SABETA South African Board of Education and Training in Agriculture
SAIDE South African Institute for Distance Education
SANHANES-1 South African National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey
SADC Southern African Development Community
SCAGA Siyazama Community Allotment Garden Association
SEED Schools Environmental Education and Development
TBF Tiger Brands Foundation
UNDP United Nations Development Programme
UNISA University of South Africa
VUFA Vukuzenzele Urban Farmers Association
5
1. Introduction
Africa is one of the most rapidly growing economic regions in the world today, with significant
commercial successes being registered in the telecommunication, banking, retail and construction
industries.1 Real gross domestic product (GDP) across the continent has grown by an average of 5%
per annum from 2000 to 2012. However, this economic growth has not translated into broad benefits
for the millions of Africans who continue to be plagued by poverty, hunger and malnutrition. Although
more than two-thirds of African citizens depend on agriculture for their incomes, the sector has not
grown significantly during the same period despite its enormous potential “to drive inclusive economic
growth, improve food security, and create opportunities for millions of Africans”.2 Current research
indicates that in sub-Saharan Africa, growth in agriculture is 11 times more effective in reducing
poverty than other sectors.3
Periodic droughts, crop failures and other disasters are the most cited causes of food insecurity in the
region. While these are important factors in engendering vulnerability to food shortages across
national boundaries, uneven access to food is a far deeper challenge.4 Even when food is available in
the market, households fail to access it due to low incomes and limited and unstable livelihood
options. This demonstrates the complexity of food security and the need by national governments to
craft integrated approaches spanning across various sectors in order to prevent famine, starvation
and food insecurity in the region.
1.1 Hunger in the midst of bounty
South Africa is deemed a food secure country, with the means to produce enough staple foods or
capacity to import food should there be deficits. However, this is true only at national level when
aggregate agricultural production is taken into account. At the household level, food insecurity is rife.
Recent research results of the South African National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey
(SANHANES-1) indicate that only 45.6% of the population is food secure, 28.3% are at risk of hunger
and 26% experience hunger or are food insecure. The highest prevalence of food insecurity is among
population groups resident in urban informal settlements (32.4%) and rural areas (37%)5.
This food security paradox disproportionately affects previously disadvantaged communities, the
majority of whom are resident in dry former homelands and dependent on subsistence farming. With a
very narrow production base, these households also lack the cash to purchase food to feed their
families.
Household vulnerability to food shortages affect children more severely than adults. Approximately
1.5 million children under the age of six years are stunted due to chronic malnutrition, resulting in
decreased physical activity, slow cognitive development and poor educational outcomes.6 Overall,
food insecurity impedes human potential for productivity thus affecting social and economic
development of the country.
1 Leke, C., Lund, C., Roxburgh, C. & van Wamelen, A. 2010. What’s driving Africa’s growth
2 World Bank. 2013. “African Development Indicators”
3 Christiaensen, L., Demery, L & Kuhl, J. 2010. “The (evolving) role of agriculture in poverty reduction – an
empirical perspective”. Journal of Development Economics. 4 Africa Human Development Report. 2012. Towards a food secure future. UNDP: New York
5 Shisana O., Labadarios D., Rehle T., Simbayi L., Zuma K., Dhansay A., Reddy P., Parker, W. Hoosain, E.,
Naidoo P, Hongoro C, Mchiza Z, Steyn NP, Dwane N, Makoae M, Maluleke T, Ramlagan, S., Zungu, N., Evans MG, Jacobs L, Faber M, & SANHANES-1 Team (2013) South African National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (SANHANES-1). Cape Town: HSRC Press 6 De Klerk, M. et al., 2004. Food Security in South Africa: Key Policy Issues for the Medium Term. The Human
Sciences Research Council.
6
1.2 Research objectives
The overall aim of this research is to explore the effectiveness of food security interventions, the
lessons learnt and opportunities for ending hunger in the country.
The specific objectives of the research are to:
assess the state of food (in)security in urban and rural areas and its implications on business,
the economy and society;
review government’s response and interventions to ensure food security in the country;
evaluate current private interventions in promoting agriculture, food security and livelihoods;
and
identify emerging opportunities for high impact CSI in eliminating food insecurity in the
country.
1.3 Scope of the research
Food security is a broad and complex subject. This research will focus specifically on subsistence
agriculture in rural areas, school-based feeding programmes and food gardens, and urban agriculture.
The research will also explore government programmes and policies implemented to promote food
security. The role of the private sector in piloting innovative solutions to address the food security
paradox will also be highlighted in order to draw lessons for sharing with wider audiences.
2. Food Security Perspectives
2.1 Definition of food security
Food security is both a sustainable development and human rights issue with multiple dimensions.
The most widely accepted definition of food security was coined at the World Food Summit of 1996 as
follows: “Food security exists when all people, at all times, have physical and economic access to
sufficient, safe and nutritious food that meets their dietary needs and food preferences for an active
and healthy life.7”
This definition indicates that food security is predicated on the following four key pillars:
Food availability: The availability of sufficient quantities of food of appropriate quality at all
times.
Food access: Access by individuals to adequate resources for acquiring appropriate food for
a nutritious diet. (Resources refer to income and other entitlements, including rights to access
common resources in communities or those provided by the state such as welfare grants or
food parcels.)
Utilisation: appropriate use of food based on knowledge of basic nutrition and care, as well as
adequate water and sanitation.
Stability: To be food secure, an individual, household or population must have access to
adequate food at all times. This requires the ability to respond to and manage economic
shocks and climatic crises or cyclic events such as seasonal food security.
Food security is also defined at three strategic levels: national, community and household:
7 FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations). 1996. “Rome Declaration on World Food
Security and World Food Summit Plan of Action.” World Food Summit, 13–17 November, Rome. www.fao.org/docrep/003/w3613e/w3613e00.htm. Accessed 12 February 2014.
7
National food security: this refers to the condition whereby the nation is able to manufacture,
import, retain and sustain food needed to support its population with minimum per capita
nutritional standards.8
Community food security: this is defined as the condition whereby the residents in a
community can obtain safe, culturally accepted, nutritionally adequate diets through a
sustainable system that maximises community self-reliance and social justice.9
Household food security: this refers to the availability of adequate food in one’s home and
household members do not live in hunger or fear of starvation.9
Research has shown that food security, poverty and unemployment are intricately linked in a vicious
cycle. Chronic food insecurity increases household vulnerability, thus fuelling poverty. Loss (or lack)
of income through unemployment contributes to further food insecurity and poverty. Poverty also
creates challenges that may limit the ability of household members to seek employment, thus locking
households in a poverty trap.10
2.2 Global food security
Global statistics for the period between 2011 and 2013 indicate that 12% of the world’s population
suffered from chronic hunger. This is a significant decline from 19% in the period 1990-92. Of the 842
million people who are chronically hungry in the world today, 827 million are in developing countries.
Africa continues to have the highest prevalence (25%) of people experiencing chronic hunger. Sub-
Saharan Africa has the highest prevalence of undernourishment (24.8%), although this has declined
from 32.7% in the last two decades. Overall the proportion of undernourished people in developing
countries has decreased from 24% in the period 1990-92 to 14% between 2011 and 2013.11
Although many countries in Africa have made significant progress in reducing the number of food
insecure people, most are unlikely to meet the millennium development goal (MDG) of halving the
proportion of people who are undernourished by the year 2015. Asia and Latin America are
remarkably close to meeting the MGD targets on hunger. Africa would require taking more urgent
steps that deliver quick results to meet the targets. Such interventions include cash transfers and
cash-and-voucher schemes to increase both consumption and investment in agricultural assets.
However, in order to increase food security in the long term countries must invest in agriculture to
stimulate food production, especially among smallholder farmers.12
2.3 The state of food security in South Africa
The discourse on food security in South Africa began to attract much attention after 1994 with the
transition from apartheid to democratic rule. Poverty was rife among the majority of South Africans
who had been excluded from participating in the mainstream economy and endured years of extreme
social and economic deprivation.13
Under the new South African constitution of 1996, every citizen
has a right to sufficient food, water and social security. Food security was one of the immediate
priorities set by the government in order to redress the inequalities created under apartheid. In
8 Anderson, S.A. 1990. Core indicators of nutritional state for difficult-to-sample populations, Journal of Nutrition, 120: 1559–
1600. 9 Radimer, K.L., Olson, C.M. & Campbell, C.C. 1990. Development of indicators to assess hunger, Journal of Nutrition, 120:
1544–1548. 10
The Human Development Report. 1996. United Nations Development Programme: New York. 11
FAO, IFAD & WFP. 2013. The State of Food Insecurity in the World 2013. The multiple dimensions of food security. Rome,
FAO. 12
FAO, IFAD & WFP. 2012. The State of Food and Agriculture. Rome, FAO. 13
Lund, F. 2008. Changing Social Policy – The Child Support Grant in South Africa. Cape Town: HSRC Press.
8
subsequent years, food security has remained a significant aspect in national policy driven by the
MDGs on hunger, set to be achieved by 2015.
South Africa is an upper-middle income country with adequate capacity to produce sufficient amounts
of food to feed its population and ability to import food should there be deficits.14
With the most
productive agriculture in the continent, South Africa is the largest producer and exporter of maize and
second largest producer of wheat. Maize output increased from 3.2 million tonnes in 1991/92 to a
peak of 13.4 million tonnes in 2009/10. Current production levels have remained firmly around 10
million tonnes. The bulk of maize output is produced by about 8000 commercial maize growers in the
country. Wheat production, although still sufficient to meet local demand, has declined in recent
years. In 1991/92 wheat output of 2.5 million tonnes was produced on 974 000 hectares. In 2011/12
the output declined to 1.76 tonnes on 551 000 hectares. Sorghum and sunflowers are also being
produced at significant levels, with potential for both domestic and export potential.15
Over the last two decades, the country has met its domestic requirements for maize (100%), wheat
(95%), livestock (96%) and dairy products (100%). Shortfalls have been filled by imports from SADC
and EU countries.16
Although South Africa has consistently produced an adequate supply of food at
the national level, food security at community and household level has remained elusive.14
Food
security statistics in 2008 indicate that 48% of the population was food secure, up from 25% in 1999;
25% were at risk of hunger compared to 23% in 1999; and 25.9% were food insecure versus 52.3% in
1999.17,18
Current statistics from the SANHANES indicate that 45.6% of the population is food secure;
28.3% is at risk of hunger; and 26% is experiencing hunger. Further analysis of these data indicates
that food security status in the country has not improved, but has been maintained since 2008.5
Rural and urban informal dwellers are the most likely among the population to experience hunger.
Thirty seven percent of the rural population and 32.4% of the urban informal settlement population
experience hunger. This is corroborated by the findings that 58% of households in urban informal
settlements and 51% of households in rural areas indicated that they lacked adequate financial
resources to purchase food and other basic requirements. Geographically, the Eastern Cape and
Limpopo have hunger prevalence rates above 30% while Western Cape (16.4%) and Gauteng
(19.2%) had the lowest hunger prevalence rates.5
Further evidence indicates that the prevalence of hunger is highest among black Africans (30.3%) and
the Coloured population (13.1%). A large proportion (28.5%) of the Indian and black African
population (25.1%) are at risk of hunger. Black African (44%), Coloured (28%) and Indian (12%)
households reported not having adequate money to buy food and other basic necessities. The
majority (89.3%) of the white population was food secure and only 6% indicated that they did not have
enough money to purchase food.5
14 Human Sciences Research Council. 2004. Food Security in South Africa: Key Policy Issues for the Medium Term–Position
Paper. Pretoria, Human Sciences Research Council. 15
Hannon, P. 2012. Country Profile: South Africa looks far and wide for long-term growth. African Agriculture Review. Nedbank
Capital. 16
Department of Agriculture. 2002. The Integrated Food Security Strategy for South Africa. Pretoria 17
Labadarios, D., Swart, R,., Maunder, E.M.W., Kruger, H.S., Gericke, G.J., Kuzwayo, P.M.N., Ntsie, P.R., Steyn, N.P.,
Schloss, I., Dhansay, M.A., Jooste, P.L. & Dannhauser, A. 2008. Executive summary of the National Food Consumption Survey
Fortification Baseline (NFCS-FB-I) South Africa, 2005. South African Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 21(3) (Suppl. 2): 247–300 18
Labadarios, D. et al. 2011. Food security in South Africa: A review of national surveys. Bulletin of the World Health
Organization, 89: 891-899.
9
The provision of social grants has been hailed as a significant intervention to militate against poverty.
There is ample evidence to suggest that cash transfers through social grants have resulted in
improvements in the quantity and quality of food consumption, which improves nutritional status and
lowers documented levels of morbidity and stunting among children in vulnerable households.19
Furthermore, by subsidising current consumption, social grants enable households to save and invest
in health and education. In rural areas, social grants support investments in productive physical
capital, such as improved housing and smallholder agriculture.20
2.3.1 Food prices and food security
Food is one of the most price sensitive and income-responsive commodities. Increases in the overall
inflation rate and food inflation rate increase the vulnerability of both rural and urban consumers to
food insecurity. In South Africa, high food inflation has been prevalent over the last decade.
International commodity prices, depreciation in the Rand/USD Exchange rate and local increases in
the cost of electricity have generally been responsible for the increases in year-on-year food price
inflation. According to Statistics South Africa the current inflation rate is 5.8% and food inflation is
4.3%.21
Prices of staple food commodities have increased over time. The cost of the basic food items, for
example, bread, meat, milk, cheese, vegetables, sugar and cooking oil increased by 49% from
R189.94 in 2008 to R283.90 in 2013. The table below shows the price increases for some of the basic
food items.
Table 1: Increases in basic food prices (2008 – 2013)
Bread Milk (per litre) White Sugar
(2.5kg)
Cooking Oil
(750ml)
Jan 2008 R5.89 R8.46 R14.79 R12.70
Jan 2010 R7.83 R9.89 18.15 R12.81
April 2013 R10.11 R11.16 24.65 R17.02
Source: http://www.fin24.com/Debt/News/Food-prices-up-49-in-5-years-20130602
In the last year price inflation rates of 6% or more were experienced for the following products in the
food basket: rice, white bread, cabbage, potatoes, tea, maize meal, margarine, instant coffee and
milk. Urban and rural consumers also experienced price differences making them disproportionately
vulnerable to food insecurity.22
For example, rural consumers paid more for the same items as
compared to urban consumers resulting in reduced affordability of important staple foods (rice, bread,
and maize meal) and reduced dietary diversity of consumers.23
2.3.2 Food security, malnutrition and health
19 Gertler, P.J. & Boyce, S. 2001. An experiment in incentive-based welfare: The impact of PROGRESA on health in Mexico.
Unpublished Research Report. Berkley: University of California. 20
Martinez, S. 2005. Pensions, poverty and household investments in Bolivia. Draft typescript. Berkley: University of California, Department of Economics. 21
Food Prices - Bureau for Food and Agricultural Policy. Accessed online: http://www.bfap.co.za/index.php/focus/consumer-
and-retail-analysis/food-prices. Accessed on 23 March 2014. 22
Food Price Monitor. 2014. Issue 2014/ February. Markets and Economic Research Centre: National Agricultural Marketing
Council (NAMC). 23
Food Price Monitor. 2014. Issue 2014/ February. Markets and Economic Research Centre: National Agricultural Marketing
Council (NAMC).
10
A key element of food security is access to food that is nutritious, which makes it possible for
households to live active and productive lives. Access to adequate food alone is necessary but not
sufficient to keep malnutrition at bay. The variation in the prevalence of malnutrition among different
socio-economic groups in South Africa is a direct result of the poverty and inequality emanating from
apartheid policies.
As a direct result of malnutrition, 27% of children under the age of five are stunted (low height for
age), 12% are underweight (low weight for age), and 5% are wasted (low weight for height). About
15% of the infants born to hungry mothers with poor nutrition have low birth weight.24
Malnutrition
increases the incidence of infant mortality, impairs physical and mental development, and ultimately
inhibits school performance and attendance. Economic costs of malnutrition are associated with a
population of children who grow up to be less productive as adults, earn less and have more health
problems than their peers. Furthermore, with less education and limited employment opportunities,
these adults are likely to become a liability to society through a greater reliance on state welfare
programmes or through engaging in crime.25,26,27
. Most poor people rely on their ability to perform
manual labour to survive, and malnutrition limits their ability to engage in physical tasks. As a result
malnutrition entrenches poverty, poor education and health outcomes in poor communities. It is
expected that South Africa will lose up to a total of US$1.9 billion to chronic diseases as a result of
malnutrition by 2015.28
Vitamin and mineral deficiencies are other dimensions of malnutrition affecting previously
disadvantaged communities disproportionately. Health statistics indicate that 19% of pregnant women
and 17% of pre-school aged children are deficient in Vitamin A29
; and 24% of pre-school aged
children and 22% of pregnant women are anaemic.30
It is estimated that South Africa loses over
US$1.1 billion in GDP to vitamin and mineral deficiencies per annum.3,4
By contrast, it would cost
US$55 million per annum to finance interventions to address micro-nutrients deficiencies.31
Eliminating malnutrition requires a multi-sectoral approach( agriculture, education, transport, gender,
the food industry, health and other sectors) to ensure that households have access to adequate
amounts of diverse and nutritious diets.
2.3.3 Rural agriculture
South Africa has a dual agricultural system comprising of a highly sophisticated commercial farming
sector dominated by white farmers on one hand and a smallholder subsistence farming sector
primarily consisting of black farmers on the other hand.32
Land ownership is also skewed in favour of
white commercial farmers, who own over 80% of the farming land in the country while smallholder
farmers own around 15% of the farming land. The remainder is owned by various municipalities
across the country. Current statistics indicate that government owns 14% of total land in the country
24 UNICEF. 2009. State of the World’s Children. New York: UNICEF.
25 Shaw, D.J. 2009. Global food and agricultural institutions. New York: Routledge.
26 FAO, 2006. The State of Food Security in the World. Rome: FAO.
27 UNICEF, 2005. State of the World’s Children: Childhood Under Threat. New York: UNICEF.
28 Abegunde D., et al. 2007. The Burden and Costs of Chronic Diseases in Low-Income and Middle-Income Countries. The
Lancet 370: 1929–38. 29
WHO. 2009. Global Prevalence of Vitamin A Deficiency in Populations at Risk 1995-2005. WHO Global Database on Vitamin
A Deficiency 30
WHO. 2008. Worldwide Prevalence of Anaemia 1993-2005: WHO Global Database on Anaemia. 31
UNICEF and the Micronutrient Initiative. 2004. Vitamin and mineral deficiency: a global progress report. 32
Encyclopedia of the Nations. 2008. South Africa Agriculture. (http://www.nationsencyclopedia.com/economies/Africa/South-
Africa-AGRICULTURE.html
11
while 79% of the land is privately owned and 7% of the land has not been accounted for.33
Commercial agriculture has been well supported through infrastructure, marketing, financial resources
and technology advancement to raise productivity on the farms. Since 1994 agricultural production on
commercial farms has almost doubled. Although subsidies to commercial farmers have been
significantly reduced since 1994, commercial farmers still have far better access to credit and other
support services than smallholder farmers. Smallholder agriculture is diminishing as productivity
declines due to insufficient financial support including lack of technical extension support services.
Thus smallholder agriculture is highly vulnerable to seasonal variations and episodes of drought and
floods.32
In an effort to correct the inequalities in land ownership, the government enacted policies and
instituted a land reform programme to transfer 33% or 24.6 million hectares of private or commercial
agricultural land to previously disadvantaged smallholder farmers by 2014. The Land Reform
Programme was established in 1994 with three main focus areas: Land Restitution, Land
Redistribution and Land Tenure Reform34
. However, the land reform programme has already missed
the set targets. By 2011, only 6.2 million hectares of land (or about a quarter of the initial target) had
been transferred through restitution claims and redistribution.35
Hunger and malnutrition in rural areas stem from insufficient, unstable food supplies at the household
level. To assure household food security, food must be locally available, accessible and affordable.36
However, most poor rural residents are net deficit food producers and rely on cash income to meet
their food needs.37
Sources of cash income in rural communities include wages, temporary
employment, grants, and remittances from migrant workers. Reliance on agriculture is minimal as any
seasonal variation can result in food shortages within the household. Besides, the rural poor are
decreasingly engaging in agriculture due to poor access to agricultural land and inputs, including
labour and biophysical factors such as soil fertility.38
Food in rural households is usually insufficient at different times of the month or year depending on
income source and seasonality of production. Most poor households who engage in food production
do so primarily out of necessity as an additional livelihood strategy. Women are the primary food
producers in rural areas, making up to 61% of all those involved in farming. These women often are
mothers and grandmothers with poor education.37
2.3.4 Food gardens
Interventions to alleviate food insecurity often take the form of cash-transfers, food parcels, food
stamps and food gardens. Of the various options, food gardens arguably offer the most cost effective
and sustainable option in the long term. In South Africa the focus on migrant labour turned most rural
communities into labour pools and destroyed the peasantry and household food production practices
including gardening. However, the tendency towards growing one’s own food remains a significant
part of the social and economic livelihoods of both rural and urban populations. Food gardens
33 Land Audit Report. 2013. Presentation to the Portfolio Committee on Rural Development and Land Reform.
34 Kirsten, J.F. and Van Zyl, J. 1999. Approaches and Progress with Land Reform in South Africa. Agrekon 38
35 Institute for Poverty, Land and Agrarian Studies (PLAAS)
36 Republic of South Africa, 2002. “The Integrated Food Security Strategy for South Africa”. Department of Agriculture: Pretoria
37 Ngqangweni, S.S., Kirsten, J.F. & Delgado, C.L. 2001. How efficient are African smallholders? A case study in the Eastern
Cape Province of South Africa. Agrekon 40(1):58-65. 38
Drimie, S., Germishuyse, T, Rademeyer, L. & Schwabe, C. 2009. Agricultural production in Greater Sekhukhune: the future
for food security in a poverty node of South Africa. Agrekon, Vol 48, No. 3.
12
promote household self-reliance and have enormous potential to increase the diversity of nutritious
food produced and available to households.39
Food gardens are often and inaccurately viewed as predominantly urban phenomena. Food gardens
are both a rural and urban practice. This section highlights available evidence related to the
contribution of food gardens to food security.40
2.3.4.1 Food gardens in urban areas
Urban migration is a global phenomenon, with half of the world’s population residing in urban areas.41
In South Africa 61,7% of the population is in urban areas.42
In South Africa urban migration has put a
strain on housing, health and provision of energy, water and waste management services. These
problems are more acute in urban informal settlements, where household food insecurity is also
high.43
Food insecurity in urban areas and elsewhere in the country has been exacerbated by the
global economic recession, which has had a tremendous impact on basic food prices as well as fuel
and energy (electricity).
The urban population is more vulnerable to food price fluctuations because of its reliance on the
market to purchase food. With high levels of unemployment, particularly in urban areas the notion of
urban agriculture offers various advantages. In 1996 the United Nations Development Programme
(UNDP) stated these advantages as follows: “For the poorest of the poor, it provides good access to
food. For the stable poor, it provides a source of income and good quality food at low cost. For
middle-income families, it offers the possibility of savings and a return on their investment in urban
property. For small and large entrepreneurs, it is a profitable business.”44
Urban agriculture has potential to provide both supplementary food for household consumption and
income which can be used to purchase other household commodities. However, despite the obvious
benefits of urban agriculture in enhancing food security especially among the urban poor, its
implementation is fraught with challenges. Institutional constraints include the lack of access to land
with secure tenure; absence of clear and coherent policies to guide urban agriculture; and lack of co-
operation between municipal departments, NGOs and community based organisations (CBOs)
involved in urban agriculture.45
Where land can be secured access to an adequate supply of water is another major challenge.
Finally, the co-operative model often used in urban agriculture brings its own challenges such as lack
of commitment, infighting and plundering of resources by participants. In some cases lack of skills of
39 de Klerk et al., 2004. Food Security in South Africa: Key Policy Issues for the Medium Term. Position Paper: Human
Sciences Research Council. 40
Austin, A & Visser, A. 2002. Study Report: Urban Agriculture in South Africa. Council for Scientific and Industrial Research
Report no. BOU/1243, Pretoria. 41
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. 2005. Urban Systems. Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: Current State and Trends.
Findings of the Condition and Trends Working Group. Millennium Ecosytem Assessment Series Volume 1. Washington D.C.:
Island Press. (http://www.millenniumassessment.org/documents/document.296.aspx.pdf 42
The Centre for Development and Enterprise (CDE). 2005. Land Reform in South Africa: A 21st century perspective,
Research Report No 14 (Abridged version). (http://www.cde.org.za/article.php?a_id=36 43
Human Sciences Research Council (HSRC). 2004. Food Security in South Africa: Key policy issues for the medium term.
Position Paper. (http://www.hsrc.ac.za/research/outputDocuments/2394_DeKlerk_FoodSecurityinSA.pdf 44
Hampwaye, G., Nel, E. & Rogerson, C.M. 2007. Urban agriculture as local initiative in Lusaka, Zambia. Environment and
Planning C: Government and Policy 25, pp 553–572. (http://www.envplan.com/epc/fulltext/c25/c7p.pdf 45
Hemson, D., Mike Meyer, M. & Maphunye, K. 2004. Rural Development: The Provision Of Basic Infrastructure Services.
HSRC Position Paper.
13
both participants and those managing these projects often affect the successful running of urban
agriculture projects.45
2.3.4.2 Food gardens in rural communities
Historically, farmers in former homelands grew adequate food for their own consumption. Household
food supply was generally adequate and secure. The shift to apartheid policies transformed
communities into labour pools for the mining and large scale commercial farming sector. Agriculture in
rural communities subsequently declined, rendering most households food insecure and reliant on
cash in income to buy food.
Although production of food crops has declined, households still grow and consume their own
vegetables. Rural communities appear to benefit more from food gardens than urban communities
with respect to the proportion of household income and the nutritional diversity.46
In addition to food
gardens, rural communities engage in domestic livestock production at a scale much larger than
urban dwellers. Survey evidence also indicates that the challenges faced by urban households
engaging in food gardens are less severe in rural areas.40
However, major challenges encountered by
rural households engaged in food gardens related to lack of extension support and erratic availability
and access to water.40
2.3.5 Food security challenges in South Africa
In 2002 the Department of Agriculture published the integrated food security strategy for South Africa,
which cited five key areas considered to be the key food security challenges in the country:
Inadequate Safety Nets: Poor households are characterised by few income-earners, and
many dependants. Many households are often primarily dependent on migrant remittances
and social security grants, making them vulnerable to food insecurity
Weak Support Networks and Disaster Management Systems: South Africa does not yet have
a structured system of dealing with food security disasters, such as droughts or floods. These
disasters, which occur at regular intervals, can substantially threaten the food security
position of agriculture-based households.
Inadequate and Unstable Household Food Production: Hunger and malnutrition in South
Africa stem from insufficient, unstable food supplies, at the household or intra-household
level. The majority of producers in the former homelands are unable to feed their families from
their narrow production base. Government assistance is often a major source of income for
these households.
Lack of purchasing power: The majority of households in South Africa lack cash to purchase
food. Underlying the lack of purchasing power is the limited scope of income opportunities,
especially in the rural areas.
Poor Nutritional Status: Despite the declaration that every South African citizen has the right
to safe and nutritious food at all times, nutrition remains a major challenge especially among
children.
2.3.6 Agricultural training and research
Agricultural Education and Training (AET) plays a significant role in rural development, food
production and agricultural trade. Strong institutions, well-trained human resources and sound policies
are also important elements. The current challenges in agriculture and rural development in South
46 Aliber, M. & Modiselle, S. 2002. Pilot study on Methods to monitor household-level food security. Report for the National
Department of Agriculture: Pretoria.
14
Africa relate to poor human resources, weak institutions and education curricula that is not responding
to the new skills required in the economy.47,48
The South African Board of Education and Training in Agriculture (SABETA) was established in 1994
in response to the need for the coordination of agricultural training. SABETA's objective is to
coordinate all aspects of agricultural training in South Africa, to bring about maximum mobility among
the various role-players and to identify relevant needs.
Formal agricultural training is available at different levels (i.e. primary schools, secondary schools,
colleges of agriculture, and universities). Certain secondary schools offer agriculture as a formal
subject. There are also special agricultural high schools in the provinces where pupils are required to
take one or more agricultural subjects. Colleges of agriculture offer three-year national diplomas in
agriculture and related disciplines. Courses usually consist of two years formal training at the college
followed by one year of structured experiential training at an approved employer. Prospective farmers,
extension officers, animal health and engineering technicians are trained at the colleges of agriculture
belonging to and being managed by the provincial and national departments of agriculture. Practical
training takes up about half the student's time. The balance is devoted to lectures and
demonstrations. Several universities in the country have faculties, departments or schools of
agriculture, and offer four-year graduate courses.49
Enrolment in AET institutions reflects that the majority of students are Black and a higher proportion of
these are male. The proportion of White students is also significantly high, with very few enrolments
by Coloured and Indian population groups. For example, in 2005, a total of 1739 students were
enrolled in the Colleges of Agriculture. Fifty percent (50%) of these were Black, 43% were White, and
less than 7% was made up by the other population groups. Male enrolments constituted 72% of total
students enrolled, while female students made up only 28% of total students. White males were
particularly dominant, making up 51% of total enrolment. Most of the Black students are enrolled in
courses that focus on general Agriculture and Agriculture Management, while White students are
more likely to enrol in areas such as Agricultural Engineering, Agricultural Economics, Viticulture, and
Veterinary Science in which there are scarce skills.50
The current trends of education in South Africa affect the agriculture sector. Agriculture information is
not integrated with other development programmes to address the challenges faced by small-scale
and emerging farmers. Provision of agricultural training can significantly contribute towards promoting
and capacitating small scale and emerging farmers. However, the challenge in achieving this potential
is that there is poor and inconsistent quality control and poor quality of staff in most agriculture
schools and Further Education and Training (FET) Colleges. In addition, the ineffective and non-
responsive AET systems and poor access by emerging and new entrants into the agricultural sector
makes it harder for people to get good agricultural training. Underlying these difficulties is the negative
career image of agriculture in society. Research has shown that most youths perceive agriculture as
an occupation for the poor and elderly and not as a profitable enterprise. This is further worsened by
47 African Development Forum, 1999. Theme 4 – Democratizing access to the Information Society. Economic Commission for
Africa Accessed at http:// www.uneca.org /adf99/ democratising.htm 48
DoA, 2005. Address by Minister for Agriculture and Land Affairs, Ms Thoko Didiza, at AgriSA Congress on 12 October 2005
in Kimberley, South Africa. Available at: http://www.info.gov.za /speeches/2005/05101710451001.htm. 49
Agricultural Digest 2005/2006. Accessed at: http://www.nda.agric.za/doaDev/sideMenu/links/Digest8.htm 50
DoA, 2006. Keynote address delivered by Honourable Minister for Agriculture and Land Affairs Ms Lulu Xingwana at the launch of the College of Agriculture and environment Sciences on 30 August 2006 at the University of South Africa, Pretoria.
15
the failure to secure employment by learners with diplomas and other qualifications in agriculture.51
Women play a major role in food production, food access and food utilisation52
. Statistics indicate that
60% to 80% of the smallholder farmers are women and yet very few of them have been trained in the
agricultural sector. However, it is now recognised that stagnation in agriculture is in part a result of the
gender insensitivity that results in excluding women in agricultural education, research and
development programmes.53
Much of the support in agriculture provided by development agencies and other stakeholders is
focused directly on the agricultural sector, and the role of higher education has been diminished.
There is a general lack of locally-based graduate programmes in agriculture and the number of
scholarships to support such training has dwindled. Where graduate programmes in agriculture exist,
the graduates are rarely exposed to smallholder farmers and most of the training is more theoretical
with very little practical exposure. Many agricultural students come from urban areas, and the few
from the rural areas are not interested in returning.54
Investment in human capital development, in the form of professional, managerial and technical
training, produced by investment in schools, FET and agricultural colleges, universities, and formal
and informal farmer training would also be valuable in promoting the small-scale farming sector.
3. National Policy Responses to Food Insecurity
Food security has been a priority policy objective since 1994, when South Africa became a
democratic country. A framework of action to address food insecurity was developed and this fed into
the broader Reconstruction and Development Programme (RDP) launched in 1994. Section 26 and
27 of the South African Constitution of 1996 also makes provisions for the rights to the physical well-
being and health of all South Africans, including the right to sufficient food and water; and social
security.55
Following the drafting of the Agriculture White Paper in 1995, the South African government
developed policies with strategic objectives to reduce or eliminate poverty, increase food security and
reduce malnutrition in the country. Public spending was directed towards various social programmes,
such as school feeding, child support grants, community public works programmes, provincial
community food garden initiatives, and production loans schemes for smallholder farmers. However,
two decades later, food insecurity remains a real challenge for the majority of the rural and informal
urban population groups, thereby casting doubt on the effectiveness of government interventions.
Indeed, there is little evidence that has been made available to suggest the extent to which strategic
objectives on food security have been achieved.56
51 Agricultural Education and Training Strategy. 2005. National Education and Training Strategy for Agriculture and Rural
Development in South Africa. Department of Agriculture: Pretoria. 52
Paroda, R.S. 2002. Engendering the Curricula of our Agricultural Universities. Engendering Undergraduate Agricultural Education: A Resources Guide. Proceedings No. 35: 3-5. 53
Swaminathan, M.S. 2000. Engendering the Agricultural Curriculum. In Rabindranathan, S. (Ed.). Engendering Undergraduate Agricultural Education: A Resource Guide. Proceedings No. 35: Pp6-7. 54
Nieuwoudt, S. 2012. Tertiary agricultural education crucial for food security. Accessed at: http://blogs.sun.ac.za/news/2012/11/13/tertiary-agricultural-education-crucial-for-food-security/. 55
Aliber, M. 2009. Exploring Statistics South Africa’s National Household Surveys as sources of information about household-
level food security. Agrekon Vol. 48:4. 56
Mthembu, N., n.d. The government’s response to combating food insecurity: Are there opportunities for collaboration with civil
society? AFRA. Accessed at: http://www.afra.co.za/default.asp?id=1169.
16
Some of the central policies enacted by government in the last two decades to combat poverty, food
insecurity and malnutrition are highlighted below.
3.1 National School Nutrition Programme (NSNP)
In 1994 the Primary School Nutrition Programme (PSNP) was launched as one of the Presidential
lead projects under the RDP. The PSNP aimed to provide nutritious meals on all school days to
learners who came from disadvantaged families experiencing acute food shortages. The PSNP was
based on the realisation that without adequate food, the ability of learners to learn would be
compromised with adverse implications on education outcomes. Thus the programme played a
significant role in ensuring the right to both basic food and education for the most disadvantaged
children.
Until 2004, the PSNP was jointly managed at the national level by the Department of Health (DoH)
and the Department of Education (DoE). From then on, government resolved to task the DoE with the
full responsibility of managing both the nutritional and health aspects of the programme and the
educational elements. In subsequent years, the programme was reviewed and it was recommended
that it target all children from Grade R to secondary level in quintile 1, 2 and 3 schools. Selected
special schools were also included in the programme. This expansion of the target group resulted in
the transformation of the PSNP into the National School Nutrition Programme (NSNP) in 2009.
From its launch in 1994 to date, the school nutrition programme has been guided by the following
objectives:
to contribute to enhanced learning capacity through school feeding programmes;
to promote and support food production and improve food security in school communities;
and
to strengthen nutrition education in schools and communities
The NSNP has enabled especially needy learners to attend school and enhance their learning
capacity, as well as alleviate short-term hunger. The programme has also enabled schools in all
provinces to integrate nutrition education into their curricula as part of the Life Skills Programme
(LSP). Furthermore, the NSNP has facilitated food production through establishment of food gardens
at schools and in the community.
However, the implementation of the NSNP has met with a variety of challenges including the
following:
service providers have delivered food supplies of poor quality to schools;
delays in payment of suppliers and food handlers;
insufficient and ineffective programme monitoring; and
non-compliance with reporting requirements by schools.57
Despite the above challenges the NSNP remains relevant in providing children from poor households
with an opportunity to attend school despite possible food insecurity at home.
3.2 The Integrated Nutrition Programme (INP) of 1995
The Integrated Nutrition Programme was one of the key strategic health programmes that contributed
to a decrease in morbidity and mortality rates, as well as prevention and management of malnutrition.
Established by the DoH in 1995, the overall vision of the programme is to improve the nutrition status
57 Public Service Commission, 2008. Report on the Evaluation of the National School Nutrition Programme (NSNP). PSC:
Pretoria
17
of all South Africans. The INP aims to mainly help the people most at risk for malnutrition: children six
years old and under, pregnant women, and lactating women. The main areas of focus of the INP are
breastfeeding promotion, growth monitoring and promotion, food fortification, micronutrient
supplementation, hospital-based management of severe malnutrition, nutrition rehabilitation in
communities, and nutrition management during illness. The INP addresses these areas through
nutritional education, nutrition counselling services, support for specific ailments, and indirect
provision of healthcare services.58
Since its establishment the INP has guided the implementation of
primary health care (PHC), promoted household food security, food service management and the
treatment of specific nutrition related diseases.59
However, funding challenges still remain around
addressing micro-nutrient deficiency in pregnant and lactating mothers as well as infants.
3.3 The Integrated Food Security Strategy (IFSS) of 1996
The IFSS was established in the aftermath of the world food and security summit in Rome in 1996.
Along with 185 other countries, South Africa committed to halving the proportion of people who suffer
from hunger by 2015 in accordance with MDG 1. Following a series of policy debates a strategy
framework was developed with clear roles and responsibilities for various stakeholders at national,
provincial and local government level, as well as NGOs and CBOs to participate in programmes
designed to end household food security in rural areas.
The IFSS adopted the Food and Agriculture Organisation’s definition of food security as its vision,
which is: “to attain universal physical, social and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious
food by all South African at all times to meet their dietary and food preferences for an active and
healthy life.” The IFSS identifies five strategic objectives as follows:
increased household production and trading;
improved income generation and job creation opportunities;
improved nutrition and food safety;
increased safety nets and food emergency management systems; and
improved analysis and information system management.60
Although developed within the Department of Agriculture, the IFSS is lauded for having taken a
developmental approach rather than a narrow focus on agriculture to addressing food security.
However, the programme has remained largely unsuccessful because of poor coordination resulting
in ineffective implementation. At the core of this challenge is the failure to align and integrate policies
and programmes across different sectors and ministries.61
3.4 The Comprehensive Agricultural Support Programme of 2005
The Comprehensive Agricultural Support Programme (CASP) was an initiative involving a range of
government departments, which was targeted at those households that fail to access surplus food.
The programme spent R22 million of the R30 million budgeted for the 2005-6 financial year on 273
projects with just over 17 000 beneficiaries receiving surplus food aid. CASP also focused on skills
and knowledge transfer and financial and marketing advice with the aim to promote wealth through
agriculture and improve national and household food security.62
58 “Combating Malnutrition in South Africa". Input Paper for Health Roadmap. September 2008. Available from:
http://www.dbsa.org/Research/Documents/South%20Africa%20Nutrition_%20input%20paper_roadmap.pdf. 59
Du Toit DC, et.al, 2011.Food Security. DAFF. 60
Republic of South Africa, 2009. The Integrated Food Security Strategy for South Africa. Department of Agriculture: Pretoria. 61
HSRC, 2013.Civil Society Organisations’ Participation in Food Security in South Africa. Funded by the NDA. Final Report. 62
Mthembu, N., n.d. The government’s response to combating food insecurity: Are there opportunities for collaboration with civil
society? AFRA.Att: http://www.afra.co.za/default.asp?id=1169.
18
As part of CASP, the Micro Agricultural Finance Initiative of South Africa (MAFISA) was launched in
2005 by the National Department of Agriculture and the Development Finance Institution of South
Africa (DFI) and was operationalised the following year with a budget of R150 million and R200 million
for 2005/6 to 2006/7, respectively, as a pilot in KwaZulu-Natal, Eastern Cape and Limpopo. The aim
of MAFISA was to provide credit to aspiring black farmers and the working poor, to improve
livelihoods and reduced poverty through the creation of viable business ventures.
3.5 The Comprehensive Rural Development Programme (CRDP) of 2009
In 2009, government launched the CRDP through the Department of Agriculture, Forestry and
Fisheries (DAFF) as an effective poverty and food insecurity response by maximising the use and
management of natural resources. The three pronged strategy of the CRDP is focussed on
coordinated agrarian transformation, rural development and improved and integrated land reform. A
central component of this strategy is job creation.63
3.6 The New Growth Path (NGP) of 2010
The NGP introduced in 2010 by the national Economic Development Department (EDD) is a national
development policy that aims at improving livelihoods and reducing inequalities through job creation.
The policy articulates a vision of an integrated rural economy with land reform, job creation and rising
agricultural production contributing to this vision. The NGP specifically outlines the potential of
agriculture to generate 1 million jobs in agriculture through an effective land reform programme and
growth of irrigated and land based agriculture.
3.7 National Development Plan (NDP) Vision 2030 of 2012
In its National Development Plan, government has committed to integrating the country’s rural areas
into the national economy through successful land reform, infrastructure development, job creation
and poverty alleviation. Key actions will be taken around reviewing land tenure with a view to increase
tenure security for communal farmers, providing services to small and micro-farmers and increase
investment in irrigation infrastructure.
3.8 Food Security Policy of 2012
In 2012, DAFF published a Food Security Policy. The stated goal of the policy is to improve South
Africa’s adequacy and stability of access to safe and nutritious food at national and household level.
The strategic objectives of the policy are to eradicate hunger and poverty; and to increase public
investment in infrastructure, health, education, research and technology development and information
systems development within the comprehensive rural development framework. 64
Food security is a multifaceted and multidimensional national issue which requires inter-sectoral co-
ordination, integration and alignment with existing policies and programmes in health, education, and
environmental protection. It also requires inclusion of public, private and civil society organisations’
interests. It is this level of complexity of food security that has posed the biggest challenges resulting
in poor coordination and ineffective policy implementation. Policies designed to address food security
have also failed to deliver optimum results due to varying levels of institutional capacity to implement
food security initiatives across the provinces. Institutional capacity includes the ability to gather and
analyse food security information, developing food security monitoring systems and disaster
management. Therefore, enhancing coordination and building institutional capacity to manage food
security initiatives are necessary interventions that can boost policy implantation.
63 Republic of South Africa, 2009. Department of Rural Development and Land Reform (DRDLR).
64 DAFF, 2012. Food Security Policy.
19
4. Private Sector Responses to Food Security
4.1 Corporate social investment in food security and agriculture
Private sector support to social and development programmes through CSI continues to grow from
year to year. In 2013, total CSI spend amounted to R7.8 billion, a 13% increase (8% in inflation
adjusted terms) from R6.9 billion in 2012. Education continues to receive by far the largest share,
accounting for 43% of CSI spend. Social and community development was allocated 15% and health
received 11%. Food security and agriculture received 6% (R468 million) of the total CSI spend in
2013. According to Trialogue, the larger portion of the allocation to food security and agriculture was
channelled towards food relief and feeding schemes (35% or R163.8 million); 29% (R135.7 million) on
subsistence farming; 18% (R84.2 million) on small-scale farming and commercial agriculture; 15%
(R70.2 million) on infrastructure, facilities and equipment; and 2% (R9.4 million) on various
donations.65
Corporates are also entering into public-private partnerships in order to augment government efforts
to address food insecurity in the country. These include the following:
In Limpopo, government signed a memorandum of understanding with Massmart to provide
financial support for the Ezemvelo Direct Farm Programme through TechnoServe South
Africa. Through this partnership, small farmers have access to financial support to access
retail markets for their agricultural produce primarily through the Massmart stores for a period
of three years.
In KwaZulu-Natal, the Department of Agriculture, Environmental Affairs and Rural
Development partnered with FoodBank South Africa to alleviate food insecurity through the
establishment of a food bank and creating jobs.
AgriGauteng, in partnership with the local municipality in Devon, provincial Department of
Agriculture, the South African Police Service and the South African National Civic
Organisation are supporting vegetable gardens and livestock projects.65
Furthermore, corporate businesses whose supply chain includes farmers have also begun investing in
building the capacity of these farmers to increase production of quality crops. Other corporates are
supporting food gardens in both rural and urban communities, and school feeding programmes.65
It is worth noting that corporates are currently offering very little support offered to agriculture and
food security in comparison to other sectors. Furthermore, the level of involvement does not match
the magnitude of food insecurity being faced in both rural and urban informal settlements in the
country. Current evidence indicates that corporates are much more involved in welfare type initiatives
providing food relief. While these programmes are important in alleviating short-term hunger during
periods of food deficits they need to be complemented with more sustainable programmes that focus
on broader nutrition and food security issues such as increasing household ability to access or
produce own food. Sustainable food security programmes typically include skills training components
in order to help beneficiaries to access relevant resources and support to produce their own food.
However, where businesses have operations based in rural communities, there seems to be a shift
towards economically improving rural communities and capacitating small-scale farmers to transition
to viable and sustainable commercial farming enterprises.65
65 Trialogue 2013
20
4.2 Case studies
Despite the lack of CSI involvement in food security and agriculture interventions, there are a number
of high-impact, effective programmes being supported. In order to highlight this fact, four case studies
have been profiled below. These case studies show lessons learnt from CSI funded interventions
focused on household and community gardens, agricultural education and training and school feeding
and nutrition programmes.
4.2.1 Abalimi Bezekhaya – food gardens
4.2.1.1 Background
Abalimi Bezekhaya is a Non-Profit Organisation established in 1982. The organisation works to
empower previously disadvantaged communities of the Cape Flats through urban agriculture and
environmental programmes. Most of the residents constituting the target group for Abalimi are
impoverished, with an estimated 40% of the local population being unemployed. The majority speak
isiXhosa and are recent arrivals from the Eastern Cape – specifically the former apartheid homelands
of Transkei and Ciskei. Abalimi provide support to individuals and community groups to develop their
own organic vegetable gardens in order to supplement their diet, improve household food and
nutritional security and provide sustainable additional income. The gardens range from small
backyard home gardens to large community gardens. Other projects include street greening groups,
an award winning community park, environmental education teacher projects at schools, and
environmental street theatre events.
Abalimi’s main goal is to alleviate poverty and create self-employment through provision of training
and support in family micro-farming enterprise: growing vegetables and other food items in home
gardens, community gardens and small farms. Through micro-farming Abalimi help improve
sustainable food production and nature conservation.
4.2.1.2 Programme activities
Abalimi runs an administrative office in Phillipi and works out of two non-profit Garden Centres in
Khayelitsha and Nyanga. The majority of the core staff constitutes of mothers and grandmothers in
the community who also form part of the target group for Abalimi projects.
Research, Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation: Abalimi assist with the planning,
implementing and support of community projects to enable the targeted individual farmers
and community groups to replicate their success and transform their lives in their urban and
rural environments. Abalimi also hosts and collaborate with researchers in order to document
their experiences and share knowledge with various stakeholders. The results of this research
are used to fine tune its own development practice, so that community projects are
implemented in a manner that ensures sustainability.
Resources and Equipment Supply: In order to support individual gardeners, groups and
organisations Abalimi provide low cost, subsidised gardening resources such as manure,
seed, seedlings, tools and organic pest control remedies. These resources are supplied from
two non-profit ‘People’s Garden Centres’ in Khayelitsha and Nyanga run by fieldworkers from
these communities. Abalimi also supplies marketing and sales infrastructure and logistical
support to micro-farmers via Harvest of Hope, the first short food chain Community Supported
Agriculture (CSA) scheme of its kind that services family micro-farmers directly in Southern
Africa.
Training: Abalimi is also involved in the provision of various short training courses to
community members. Trainees are required to pay for the training and receive a certificate
21
after successful completion of each course. Bursaries are provided for trainees who cannot
afford to pay for the training. The training approach is based on participatory methodologies
that facilitate knowledge acquisition and skills transfer. The courses are also followed up with
additional on-site training and support. The courses range from one to four-day courses.
The following courses are currently on offer:
o Organic vegetable gardening courses (these promote the deep trench system, a below-
ground composting technique, enabling the soil to hold water and the gardener to plant
crops immediately above).
o Horticulture
o Courses for caretakers
o Integrated land use design workshops
Community Building: The social benefits of organic gardening and micro-farming among the
poor are enhanced through various activities such as iLIMA (mutual help-work events which
radiate goodwill out into the surrounding community); Horizontal (farmer to farmer) Learning
events / Farmer Field Schools and Savings Mobilisation.
Partnerships and Networking: Abalimi, through its own partnerships and networks, assists
community projects to connect to other opportunities and services which they may require.
4.2.1.3 Programme impact
The demand for micro-farming support has grown tremendously since the inception of the programme
in 1982. Currently Abalimi provides support for 3 500 home based garden projects and approximately
500 micro-farmers in 100 community-based garden projects per year. In total Abalimi supports 4 500
micro-farmers and their families, translating into approximately 22 500 (average five family members
per farmer) direct and indirect beneficiaries per annum.
Abalimi receives an average of 25 new applications from community groups for help with their micro-
farming projects annually and trains between 300 - 1 000 people each year through the 4-day basic
organic vegetable growing courses. It also estimated that the two People’s Garden Centres in
Khayelitsha and Nyanga serve up to 11 000 micro-farmers annually, some of whom are not affiliated
to Abalimi.
Knowledge creation and sharing is important in sustainable models for development. Abalimi works in
partnerships with researchers in order to document their practices creating a platform to evaluate
various approaches through testing and refining strategies for working with farmers. Through the
research and field testing Abalimi developed a step-by-step development continuum for community
agriculture (Figure 1). The model shows distinct phases through which micro-farmers can progress
from survival to subsistence to livelihood and finally to commercial phase. The model also shows that
social impacts are highest in the lower levels and that fewer micro-framers progress to the commercial
level. Based on this model Abalimi provides the appropriate training to farmers at each level to ensure
that they maximise the benefits thereof.
22
Figure 1: The Sustainable development continuum for organic micro-farming projects
The Harvest of Hope Marketing Project: Abalimi established the Harvest of Hope marketing project
in 2008 to provide an outlet for excess produce from micro-farmers. Through the project, farmers are
contracted to grow seasonal organic vegetables at a guaranteed price. The vegetables are packed in
boxes and sold to consumers who sign up and pay for weekly deliveries in advance. A full box
includes 9-12 seasonal organic vegetables (picked, packed and delivered on the same day) sufficient
to feed a medium family, and a small box for two people contains 6-7 seasonal vegetables. When it
was launched in 2008, Harvest of Hope started with box orders of 80/week. The demand increased to
250 boxes per week by 2010. Currently the farmers are supplying over 500 boxes per week. Many of
the existing consumers are parents who pick up their vegetables each week when they collect their
children at various schools in the southern suburbs, but the project is now extending to businesses
and institutions.
The Harvest of Hope project model provides income security to micro-farmers and any profits that are
generated are ploughed back to the development and support of the farmers via Abalimi, thus feeding
the supply chain for ongoing growth. Most of the farmers are women but more and more men are
getting involved as they see the opportunities for making a decent, dignified and sustainable living out
of peri-urban farming. A key aspect of the Harvest of Hope project is that it encourages consumers to
support a growing community of township micro-farmers.
Abalimi has also been influential in the established of several farmer associations and programmes.
Manyanani Peace Park and Moya we Khaya: The project is based on a vision of a unique
community and environmental centre and is conceived of as a pan-African intergenerational
cultural community home, which gives everyone - women, elders, youth and men – a healthy
and related place in the community and in nature.
Siyazama Community Allotment Garden Association (SCAGA) training farm,
Khayelitsha is currently in its planning phase and is expected to be launched mid-late 2014
or early 2015. The programme brings together five community gardens spanning two
hectares of land under power-lines with the aim of hosting young trainee farmers to create a
23
new wave of younger Livelihood Level micro-farmers over 2-3 year periods. The programme
is funded by Rotary Constantia & Rotary Foundation and the Avalon Foundation in the
Netherlands.
Moya we Khaya Peace Gardens, Khayelitsha was established in 2013. It is a one hectare
community garden established on land allocated by Cape Town’s City Parks. The aim of the
project is to promote local household food security and job creation for the unemployed, with
a focus on youth. Moya we Khaya is co-funded by Rotary Constantia, Rotary Foundation and
the Avalon Foundation with assistance from the Department of Agriculture.
The Schools Environmental Education and Development (SEED) programme is now an
independent agency working with school communities and teachers to infuse Environmental
Education into all teaching practice at foundation phase, incorporating and developing the
outdoor classroom as the main teaching resource.
Vukuzenzele Urban Farmers Association (VUFA): Launched in 2002, VUFA is the first
woman-led organic urban micro-farming association among the unemployed and poor in
South Africa. Abalimi has been intimately involved with its genesis and aims to assist VUFA
to become a strong voice for micro-farmers among the unemployed and poor in Cape Town.
Farm & Garden National Trust was set up in 2008 to promote and support the Abalimi
model and support micro-farming across the country.
Abalimi, its projects and staff members have collectively received 26 local, national and international
awards since 1991. The awards include the following:
3 Green Trust-WWF awards
2 Presidents Social Forestry awards
Woman of the Year award
Paul Harris Fellowship
Ashoka Fellowship
Khayelitsha Achiever Award for Community Development
Gold Impumelelo Sustainable Innovations Award
SAB Innovation Award
TOPOS mag-Barcelona
Eat-Out Zonnebloem - Earth award 2014.
4.2.1.4 Lessons learnt
After many years of training and working with micro-farmers the following lessons have emerged:
Women (mothers and grandmothers) are typically responsible for food production and
preparation in many communities and yet they have limited access to training in farming.
Abalimi has shown that targeting women and providing them with training greatly improves
household food security.
Organisations working with farmers ought to commit themselves to provide farmers with all
the necessary support from project planning through resource mobilisation and
implementation. This way projects can be established with a greater chance of being
sustainable. Abalimi supports farmers to help them establish their gardens through provision
of low-cost inputs and practical on-farm support. They further allow the micro-farmers to run
their gardens at whatever level they best can from survivalist through subsistence to small
scale commercial.
24
Illiteracy can be overcome when communities work together, pool resources and share
knowledge through community gardens. Working in groups allows for micro-farmers to learn
from each other and still have the flexibility to establish their own individual gardens to further
boost household food security.
4.2.2 In-School Breakfast Feeding Programme – The Tiger Brands Foundation
4.2.2.1 Background
The Tiger Brands Foundation (TBF) launched the in-school breakfast feeding programme in July 2011
to provide a nutritious breakfast meal to poor and vulnerable learners in no-fee primary schools. The
TBF in-school feeding programme is based on the belief that nutrition is the cornerstone for a healthy
body and healthy mind and that nutrition programmes should be a fundamental component of the
national education policy. The feeding programme was developed and implemented based on the
observation that learners were coming to school hungry and only having a meal at lunch through the
NSNP. The overall purpose of the programme is, therefore, to supplement the NSNP lunch
programme being implemented by government. The TBF school feeding programme was piloted in
six schools in Alexandra Township, where evidence from research indicated that 70% of households
are moderately or severely food insecure.
The TBF feeding programme is based on the following principles:
Encouraging ownership of the feeding programme by the school and surrounding
communities;
Sharing experiences and knowledge to produce learning;
Acting as a donor and an enabler; and
Working in partnership with government to complement the nutrition provided by the existing
NSNP.
The TBF signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Department of Basic Education
(DBE), DoH and each participating school. Partnering with government departments enables the TBF
social programmes to be aligned with national education and health priorities. The TBF approach is
focused on enabling collective responsibility of the feeding programme within the schools to enhance
sustainability.
The programme is currently operating on an annual budget of about R15 million, providing a nutritious
breakfast to 42 000 learners in 60 schools across 6 provinces each day.
4.2.2.2 Programme activities
Food preparation: The programme provides breakfast porridge of Tiger oats every morning
between 07h30 and 08h30. The breakfast is served before school begins in order not to
interrupt teaching and learning at each school. The breakfast is prepared and served by Food
Handlers who are employed from the surrounding community. The Food Handlers are trained
on an on-going basis to improve their skills and knowledge of handling and preparing food,
hygiene, and food storage as well as gas safety in the kitchen. The Food Handlers are paid a
stipend by government as they are also responsible for preparing the NSNP lunch. The TBF
also provides the Food Handlers with a top-up to the government stipend.
Kitchen facilities: The provision of food to learners is often hampered by the lack of
adequate kitchen facilities from which to prepare food. Being no-fee schools, most of these
schools do not have financial resources to finance construction of their own kitchen facilities.
As a result, the TBF provides funding for establishing kitchens or refurbishing old kitchens in
25
order to implement the feeding programme. The programme also provides the schools with
cups, plates and spoons as well as cooking utensils.
The need to fund kitchen facilities has had the negative effect of reducing the resources
available for the purchase of the breakfast porridge. In order to alleviate this challenge, the
TBF has and continues to partner with other service providers in order to reach even more
learners in more schools.
Food procurement and delivery: The smooth implementation of the feeding programme
depends heavily on the reliable and consistent delivery of the correct type of food product in
appropriate quantities to ensure that schools have adequate stocks to provide breakfast to
learners on each school day. The service providers also deliver cleaning materials for kitchen
facilities and utensils to ensure that hygienic standards are maintained. TBF has invested in
recruiting service providers that are competent and reliable in alignment with the enterprise
development imperative for Foundation. Although the service providers are successfully meeting
their contractual obligations, there are challenges in delivering food to remote rural and farm
schools without proper road infrastructure. Service providers drive almost 11 000 km each month
to deliver breakfast supplies to schools in the six provinces.
Monitoring & Evaluation: The TBF feeding programme is closely monitored on a daily basis in
order to use real time and accurate data to address operational issues and make informed
decisions. School principals are tasked with the responsibility of ensuring that the feeding
programme functions efficiently and to ensure that learners are fed breakfast every school day of
the year. In some schools, School Monitors who volunteer on the programme assist the school
principals in monitoring the programme. In order to capture real time data each school has been
provided with a cell phone pre-loaded with a monitoring and evaluation (M&E) application with
questions on food delivery, preparation, hygiene, and state of the kitchen.
The data is transferred to Provincial Coordinators who are then able to create a profile on each
school in the programme, provide feedback or necessary support to staff project coordinators and
school monitors, and generally be aware of possible risk factors that might hinder programme
delivery on a daily basis. The cell phones also have a GPS and show the time and location from
which each report is made.
The TBF has extended the M&E activity to the NSNP lunch programme in 60 schools in order to
collect and share data with government. This move is intended to assist government in data
collection and effectively improving the monitoring of the NSNP lunch.
4.2.2.3 Programme impact
Following its launch in July 2011, the programme was rolled out to 33 schools across four provinces
providing breakfast meals for almost 30 000 children in less than a year. The programme has since
grown to cover 60 schools across six provinces and feeding breakfast to almost 42 000 learners. The
programme has developed from a pilot project into a fully-fledged within a space of almost two years.
The programme impact is based on the evaluation of the pilot programme conducted in 2012. The
evaluation of the pilot phase focused on assessing the impact the programme had on the nutritional
status of the learners, school attendance and learner performance. The evaluation also assessed the
impact on the school and other social benefits associated with the feeding programme. Finally, the
pilot phase evaluation sought to identify challenges related to the feeding programme and
26
recommend areas for improvement or lessons for the replication of the feeding programme to other
areas.
Nutritional status of learners: The evaluation indicated significant improvements in the
nutritional status of the learners across all schools for all categories of malnourishment
(overweight, stunting, wasting). Prevalence of overweight among learners reduced from 28%
to 20%; prevalence of stunting improved from 19% to 14%; and prevalence of wasting among
learners improved from 5% to 3%. The overall perception is that learners have attained better
health outcomes as a result of the feeding programme.
School attendance: Principals, educators and learners reported that breakfast at school was
an incentive to attend school and to come on time. Overall absenteeism rates were low
amongst both junior and senior learners, although not statistically significant. As a result the
impact of the feeding programme on school attendance was inconclusive. However, there
was a general perception among stakeholders that school feeding remained a critical aspect
in school attendance.
School performance: The evaluation results indicated that the juniors (Grade R-3) across all
primary schools marginally improved their term average. Grade R saw the biggest
improvement across all schools while there was a slight decrease in school performance for
senior learners (Grade 4-9) over 2011. Qualitative information gathered during the evaluation
indicated that the attention span, concentration levels and participation of learners in class
generally improved. It is expected that based on this initial findings, performance will increase
substantially over time.
The learners further benefited from the programme through increased knowledge of nutrition, and
imparting new healthy eating habits and hygienic behaviors. Meal times have also become an
occasion that learners look forward to. The schools have also benefited in various ways including
through the mentorship and development of school principals; buy-in of educators and creation of a
sense of community; food handlers gaining skills and knowledge in food preparation, hygiene and
nutrition; and improved kitchen infrastructure.
4.2.2.4 Lessons learnt
The TBF engages with government and other stakeholders and openly shares its model on school
feeding in order to influence long term impact. The TBF is now in its second year of running the
school feeding programme. The successes scored to date and challenges encountered during this
period have resulted in important lessons being learnt. These lessons provide some indication as to
what might be good practice in implementing feeding programmes in schools.
Sustainability should be embedded in the programme from the design phase
The TBF feeding programme has learnt that food quality, meal times and service delivery
must be consistent over time in order to be effective. The school leadership, school monitors
food handlers and service providers must all work together in partnership and taking collective
responsibility to ensure sustainability of the programme. A deliberate capacity building
approach is necessary to ensure that all the stakeholders perform their roles optimally.
However, in the long term, sustainability of the programme will also depend on the ability of
the DBE to provide funding to schools for the procurement of food supplies and stipends for
the food handlers. Through its partnership with the DBE the Foundation advocates for the
capacity building of school principals to be able to fundraise for the school feeding
programme.
Put in place an effective M&E system
The TBF feeding programme quickly identified and responded to the need for accurate,
consistent and real-time data to enable effective and efficient monitoring of various aspects of
the programme. Monitoring is critical in ensuring that learners are provided with a nutritious
27
meal every day of the school term throughout the year. The programme also observed the
need to monitor the health status of the learners, school attendance and performance in order
to effectively set the baseline for programme evaluation. Therefore, individual schools should
collect data that can be consolidated every term to provide further learnings regarding school
feeding.
School feeding programmes should respond to new and emerging needs
Although the TBF feeding programme is running successfully providing breakfast porridge to
learners, there has been a need to add new elements to the programme. For instance, it has
been observed that older learners prefer more variety than the flagship oatmeal breakfast
being provided. Provision of milk products was also suggested by stakeholders based on
learner preferences and the nutritional value of milk. The TBF feeding programme is
responding to emerging needs and working with stakeholders to ensure that the feeding
programme remains relevant and effective. The introduction of holiday family food parcels is
one such example.
Promote public-private partnerships to enhance programme effectiveness
The TBF has been working closely with the DBE and the DoH. These partnerships have
allowed for the efficient use of resources in responding to national education and health
priorities. Further linkages on other aspects related to school feeding and nutrition are
necessary in order to facilitate holistic school development. Through its partnership with the
DBE the TBF programme is complementing the NSNP lunch. The TBF programme is further
assisting the NSNP to collect accurate data in order to improve the performance of the
programme.
Adapt the programme approach to accommodate children in various contexts
Children who come to school late should still be afforded a meal under the programme. There
are suggestions that most of the learners who come to school late are often some of the most
vulnerable children with difficult circumstances at home. The TBF in collaboration with the
schools have devise a new approach to accommodate these vulnerable learners.
Furthermore, the TBF school feeding programme has observed significant differences in
feeding learners in rural and urban contexts. Although the programme has intentions to
provide breakfast to the most vulnerable children most of which are in remote rural areas,
there is also evidence to suggest that learners in poor urban areas may be more vulnerable
than those in some rural areas where households are food secure.
4.2.3 UNISA Programme in Household Food Security
4.2.3.1 Background
The Programme Household Food Security (PHFS) is a University of South Africa (Unisa) accredited
Short Learning Programme that was designed and developed by the College of Agriculture and
Environmental Science (CAES), in collaboration with the South African Institute for Distance
Education (Saide). The programme was initially funded by the WK Kellogg Foundation.
The purpose of the PHFS is to equip individuals who wish to become household food security
facilitators with the skills that they need to help empower their improved food security status, health
and nutrition. The rationale for the development of the programme was based on:
The urgent need to improve food security and nutrition of poor rural and peri-urban
households through appropriate skills development and education;
Achievement of national food security goals by training existing community development
workers, home-based carers and other community workers, peer educators and volunteers
working within those communities; and
28
The acquired skills would add value to and create synergies with existing government, NGO
and CBO interventions and initiatives within those communities and contribute to balancing
the availability of relevant support services to all role players.
The PHFS targets existing community development workers, home-based carers and volunteers in
organisations that are working within the target communities. Targeting individuals already employed
enables them to apply their new skills within the same communities upon completion of the
programme. As they continue to work with identified vulnerable households they are more likely to
facilitate the behavioural change and learning strategies required by these households to become
more food-secure and address issues of malnutrition and hunger.
Specifically, the students completing the programme are expected to be able to:
Link relevant food security issues, concepts, policies, strategies and programmes with a
household focus for improving food sovereignty and food security.
Utilise a range of facilitation and participatory of skills, to identify and mobilise households for
improved household food security.
Assess communities for vulnerability to food insecurity and planning of food and nutrition
interventions.
Observe and analyse natural resource management systems with community members and
make suggestions for appropriate interventions.
Come up with a variety of ways and means of optimising food production and the use of
various relevant value-adding technologies and processes so as to encourage the
development of ideas for purposes of income generation using surplus food and other
available resources.
Successful graduates can be referred to as Household Food Security Facilitators.
The PHFS is a certificate course that consists of six modules (listed in the table below) providing a
total of 72 academic credits over a period of six months. Training takes place in the communities in
which the students reside. The programme integrates various aspects of nutrition, food and
agriculture within a household food security context with a focus on sustainability.
Module Title Purpose
1. Introduction to Food Security Concepts
Develop an understanding of basic Food Security
concepts with a household focus.
2. Participatory Extension for Household
Food Security
Use participatory facilitation to extend Household
Food Security.
3. Sustainable Natural Resource Use Develop sustainable natural resource use
interventions in a household food production context
with community members.
4. Food Behaviour and Nutrition Facilitate the use of acceptable food and nutrition
behaviour practices that lead to improved food and
nutrition security.
5. Optimising Household Food
Production
Facilitating the implementation of a household food
production system using micro-farming practices and
optimising resource use.
6. Food Resource Management
Facilitate the development of a household food
resource plan for improved food and nutrition
security.
29
4.2.3.2 Programme delivery
This is a distance education programme delivered mainly through print materials but supported by
promoter-led contact sessions. Promoters are experienced development practitioners who are
recruited from NGOs based in target communities and are responsible for mentoring the students
during the programme. In addition to the study materials which are provided in English only, students
also receive tutorial letters and telephone support. The programme utilises participatory learning
methodologies to deliver practical course activities and assignments carried out in the community,
working with selected households. This approach promotes co-learning of both the students and the
households participating in the programme. In order to be cost-effective, the programme enrols
students in groups of 20–25 at a time.
The CAES has the overall responsibility for delivery of the programme. On the ground, Provincial
Coordinators provide student academic and administrative support.
Assessment of the modules will consist of both formative and summative assessments:
Formative Assessment - Students are required to complete a set of assignments in each of the six
modules. The assignments contribute a maximum of 40% of the final mark. The assignments are
marked by course promoters and a selection moderated by the course/programme coordinator.
Summative Assessment - Students are required to submit a number of portfolio tasks linked to each
module that assess their competence. The portfolio tasks contribute a maximum of 60% to the final
mark. A subminimum of 40% is required for the portfolio tasks. As there is no final exam, the portfolio
tasks are marked by promoters under the supervision of the programme coordinator and then
externally moderated.
The final set of learning materials is available as Open Educational Resources (OERs) under a
Creative Commons Licence. Another exciting outcome of the programme is that the existing
programme and its materials can easily be adapted for training students at different levels of the NQF
(above and below NQF level 5.). However, this has not yet happened but remains a possibility.
4.2.3.3 Programme impact
The first cohort of the Household Food Security Programme graduated in 2012. A total of 216
Household Food Security Facilitators were awarded their certificates from Unisa College of
Agriculture and Environmental Sciences. Out of the 216 graduates, 17 passed their courses
with distinctions.
The programme is increasingly seen and reported on as being an important community
development model. Following the graduation in 2012 over 520 students have been enrolled
for the programme in in Limpopo, Eastern Cape, KwaZulu-Natal, Western Cape and the Free
State.
Several FET colleges have expressed interest in including the HFSP as one of their offerings.
Although the modalities of running this programme in conjunction with the colleges are still
being worked out, this has the potential to avail the programme to a wider number of students
with an interest in working collaboratively with vulnerable households in their communities
and help them improve their food security and nutrition status. Furthermore, students enrolling
for the programme through FET colleges will have access to the Skills Fund to cover their
tuition and other fees.
According to the evaluation of the pilot programme stakeholders (NGOs/CBOs and the
Department of Local Government) felt they benefitted organizationally from the informal
partnership through having employees that would gain capacity, expertise and skills
concerning household food security. The partners felt that these employees had changed
30
their attitudes; that they had learnt from the programme; and that the networking opportunities
provided during the pilot could extend organisations’ scope of work.
The programme enhanced skills transfer between students and promoters. While the students
gained confidence and knowledge the promoters from NGOs felt that they were now able to
make decisive and objective decisions in the community.
As a result of the initial success of the programme, there are plans to develop a higher level
post-graduate Household Food Security course in future.
At community level there are indications that the participation of households in the HFSP has
immensely contributed towards improving access to food and reduced under-nutrition. The
programme has also increase knowledge of households about nutrition.
4.2.3.4 Lessons learnt
During the pilot phase, the programme encountered various challenges related to student recruitment
and performance and programme support and facilitation. Despite meeting the required entry
qualifications, many students proved to have low literacy levels, resulting in them facing challenges
coping with the demands of the course. Some of the students struggled owing to their having been
out of the schooling system for a long time. While other students adjusted, some failed and dropped
out of the programme. With regards to programme support, some of the promoters, although
possessing commodity development experience, had less ability distinguishing between facilitating
and teaching. Some had little experience applying participatory learning-in-action approaches.
However, the programme responded to these challenges and provided in some measure viable
solutions.
Several lessons were learnt based on the evaluation of the pilot phase of the programme. These
include the following:
The programme offers an innovative model to guide higher education institutions to provide
academic programmes targeting the direct educational development of people in the
communities where they live, especially in rural areas.
Developing distance education programmes for ordinary community people with limited
academic competencies entails providing sufficient, carefully structured support in order for
students to succeed.
There is a need for programme partners to carefully screen and select students and
promoters more closely to try and ensure better retention and increased success levels.
Targeting existing community development workers, home-based carers and volunteers
working within communities increases the possibility of students to continue working with
households in these communities to address issues of malnutrition and hunger after
completion of their study programme.
Academic programmes designed to be implemented with a focus on community development
should be flexible and responsive to national needs as well as the needs of prospective
learners and employers.
Where programmes are designed with the specific intent of supporting the development of
particular communities, such initiatives should be designed, implemented and evaluated in
consultation with those communities.
The process of gaining entry into communities and forming linkages with NGOs/CBOs and
other stakeholders in the communities requires competence in building and maintaining both
formal and informal partnerships. However, for the sake of programme sustainability a shift
towards more formal partnerships is preferred to promote accountability to the community,
promoters and students by programme partners.
31
4.2.4 Integrated Food Security Programme - Mineworkers Development Agency
4.2.4.1 Background
The Mineworkers Development Agency (MDA) is a NGO established in 1997. It was originally
conceptualised and run as a development and job creation unit within the National Union of
Mineworkers (NUM). The organisation was established in response to the negative social and
economic impact of retrenchments on ex-miners, their families and communities. It is estimated that
over 500 000 jobs have been lost in the mining sector since the 1980s and the sector continues to
decline. Retrenchments have a negative impact on the household food security as most families rely
on a single income earner for sustenance.
MDA’s vision is to contribute to the eradication of poverty in communities affected by mine downsizing
with a focus on Southern Africa. The labour force in the mining sector in South Africa typically
includes foreign nationals. Thus MDA is also operational in Lesotho and Swaziland, owing to the
significant proportion of retrenched workers who return to their homes in those countries.
Through its mission to eradicate poverty and create brighter futures for their beneficiaries, MDA is
involved in initiatives that range from educational work to create access to social grants for the very
poor, permaculture gardening and community gardens for improved food security, targeted help for
emerging farmers, assistance for micro-enterprises, capacity building among community
organisations, TB testing and community level healthcare.
Current programmes include the following:
Skills Development;
Integrated Food Security;
Training and Capacity Building and
Small, Micro and Medium Enterprise Development and Community Economic Empowerment
To maximise the impact of various interventions, MDA typically works in tandem with corporates
through CSI programmes, NGOs and foreign donors to source funding.
4.2.4.2 Programme activities
The purpose of the Integrated Food Security Programme (IFSP) is to alleviate the impact of poverty in
targeted households. Programme activities include training of beneficiaries in permaculture, nutrition
and food preservation. Other services offered to beneficiaries include training in household finance
management, assistance with access to social grants, birth registration and obtaining identity
documents.
The IFSP is implemented through a series of steps as follows:
1. Recruitment of beneficiary farmers – Programme beneficiaries are identified by fieldworkers in the
target communities. The fieldworkers, with support from the Programme Coordinator, engage with
stakeholders in each community and organise community meetings to raise awareness of the
programme. House to house beneficiary recruitment is conducted by fieldworkers. Each potential
beneficiary is assisted to complete a registration form, which captures their demographic
information and social and economic status. Administrators at the various local MDA centres
compile lists of potential beneficiaries and the information is submitted to the MDA head office,
where each beneficiary on the list is given an identification number to facilitate tracking.
2. Training of beneficiaries - Based on the registration forms beneficiaries are mobilised for a 3-day
training. The training is conducted by experienced facilitators with support from the fieldworkers
who co-facilitate and practically demonstrate aspects of the training. Before the training,
32
beneficiaries are required to commit to learning and sharing farming knowledge and skills with
others, demonstrate a willingness to start work in their garden soon after the training, be willing to
cooperate with MDA staff when conducting monitoring and be willing to share pictures of their
gardens in various media. At the end of the training, each participant voluntarily signs a
Beneficiary Commitment Form. Each beneficiary receives a seed starter pack to assist them to
start their gardens. The seed types depend on the season.
The training focuses on permaculture, nutrition and food preservation. Permaculture covers the
following aspects: garden design, soil preparation, planting, mulching, irrigation, water
conservation, pest control and compost preparation. The training on nutrition focuses on nutrition
assessment and understanding of nutrient deficiency. Food preservation focuses on sun drying
techniques with emphasis on the process for each type of vegetable. Finally, the training focuses
on food preparation.
3. Monitoring of farmers – The fieldworkers are responsible for all programme monitoring activities
with support from the Facilitator who is responsible for data quality. The Quality Assurance Officer
also assists in programme monitoring through data verification.
Monitoring activities are conducted through household visits to the target beneficiaries. Monitoring
is intensive in the first three months after training to ensure establishment of gardens.
Beneficiaries are visited three times during that period, after which they are visited once every
quarter. Beneficiaries are notified about the household visits through bulk sms’s. Each beneficiary
is monitored on their commitment and targets. The household visits also provide opportunities for
beneficiaries to receive extension support from the fieldworkers. Fieldworkers collect information
and data through templates and tools that have been tested and refined over time. Based on the
information collected, fieldworkers compile reports after each monitoring cycle.
4. Quality assurance – In order to ensure quality data collection and reporting, random quality
assurance checks are conducted. Beneficiaries are randomly selected for quality assurance
checks and are visited. Quality assurance involves confirming that the beneficiary household was
indeed visited by the fieldworker and verifying the data and information that was collected.
4.2.4.3 Programme impact
Although the programme has an intensive monitoring system and quality assurance process to verify
data collected, no formal evaluation has been conducted. However, there is anecdotal evidence which
demonstrates the impact of the programme on the beneficiaries and the communities in which they
reside. This evidence has been collated through local stories captured during monitoring activities.
There has been a general improvement in the health of beneficiaries through consistent
consumption of a variety of nutritious vegetables, thereby improving dietary diversity.
Improved health has also been noted, particularly among HIV positive beneficiaries. As their
health status improved the CD4 count for some of the patients improved significantly resulting
in the termination of their HIV grants. Although this is a positive result, some patients have
lamented the loss of these grants.
Target beneficiaries have indicated that they have managed to have financial savings as they
produced their own vegetables and stopped purchasing these items.
The food security programme is viewed by beneficiaries as a social relief programme rather
than an income generating enterprise. As a result community members often donate
vegetables to orphans and child-headed households to alleviate hunger. Vegetables are also
donated at funerals to assist with feeding mourners.
33
Beneficiaries report having increased knowledge about nutrition, vegetable preservation and
food preparation.
The programme has also indirectly benefited other community members. Fieldworkers have
observed some community members copying the target beneficiaries and starting their own
small backyard gardens. These farmers are enticed by the benefits they see accruing to
programme beneficiaries and are now also willing to be trained.
Given the promising success of backyard gardens, there are more and more farmers willing to
work in groups with other farmers to form larger community gardens. The community gardens
are expected to produce more vegetables and allow farmers to produce a surplus for sale.
4.2.4.4 Lessons learnt
The programme has encountered a variety of challenges including low literacy among the
fieldworkers resulting in inconsistent documentation of programme activities and recording of local
community success stories; reluctance of older fieldworkers with extensive social networks in the
community to handover responsibilities to new and younger staff; and data quality issues owing to
dishonest and irregular data collection by some fieldworkers. Programme management has
addressed data quality issues by continuously refining data collection templates and conducting spot
field visits to check on field staff.
The following lessons have been learnt during the course of the programme:
Food security programmes must be based on ensuring that households have access to
adequate and nutritious food before introducing the commercial aspect. The IFSP found that
once the threat of hunger has been removed among households, there is potential for
involvement in other developmental and income generating activities.
There is value in promoting community education programmes to support field staff to
broaden their understanding of food security and contribute to their career development. For
example, in 2013 the MDA provided bursaries for 25 youth to go through the UNISA
Household Security Training programme (outlined above).
Beneficiary targeting is crucial to enhance programme impact and equity. In most cases
elderly women often lose out on such programmes, especially if they stay with young kids and
are responsible for their upkeep. In such cases, these grandmothers barely have enough time
to participate in food security programmes even though they would benefit the most from
them. Encouraging community members to recommend programme beneficiaries was found
to be effective in ensuring that no deserving beneficiary is left out.
In order to promote programme effectiveness and sustainability the MDA realised that they
needed to identify and recruit fieldworkers from a pool of young people resident in the
community and train them. Since these youths are known in the community it would then be
easy to mobilise community members and monitor the programme.
Transfer of knowledge and skills is empowering to beneficiaries. Once beneficiaries are
taught about permaculture, the use of grey water and other water conservation techniques
they can apply themselves and explore other ways of increasing household food security.
34
5. Discussion and Recommendations
There is general consensus that poverty and hunger in South Africa has been shaped by apartheid
and that the various social and economic interventions post-1994 have been focused on dismantling
the remnants of its legacy. Poverty, unemployment and high inequality remain the key drivers of
vulnerability to food insecurity in both rural and urban informal settlements. In order to bring about
systemic change a multi-sectoral approach remains critical. Although more research in food security
is still required, there is evidence that it is no longer narrowly viewed as relating only to agriculture but
rather extends to include health and nutrition, education, climate change, social protection, access to
services, land, inputs and water and disaster management. These sectoral linkages have been
acknowledged and in principle the stage is now set for more effective interventions. Food insecurity is
strongly related to malnutrition and poor education outcomes in children and young people. In adults,
food insecurity results in vulnerability to chronic diseases, poor health and inability to seek
employment. The implication for government is that more people will continue to be on social grants
thus putting pressure on government expenditure.
Addressing food insecurity is in the interests of all stakeholders; government, civil society and
business. The value of healthy youth and adults who can make a contribution to society through
provision of their skills in the labour market is essential for national development.
In its effort to address food insecurity government has made several policy announcements
emanating from various departments since 1994. Although instituted with good intentions, there has
been the perennial challenge around institutional capacity to manage and coordinate multi-sectoral
policies coupled with limited funding.
Notably, the private sector has been supporting several agriculture and food security projects across
the country. Most of these programmes are welfare related programmes providing food relief to
beneficiaries. Some corporates have been involved in both subsistence and commercial farming
projects while some are involved in school feeding. The school feeding programmes have been very
effective in providing children with an opportunity to access education. The feeding programmes have
improved school attendance, learner concentration and alleviated short-term hunger. However, the
impact of these programmes on improving nutrition of learners remains contested.
Although corporates are already active in the sector their level of involvement is still relatively minimal,
especially given the magnitude of food insecurity in both rural and urban informal settlements. Even
though this is the case currently; there are ample opportunities for corporates to get involved in this
sector, especially those businesses whose activities are linked to the agriculture and food supply
chain. In fact, a few corporates are beginning to explore ways of engaging with small-scale farmers to
produce and supply agricultural commodities although much more could be done.
Agriculture remains a key aspect of any intervention or policy mix designed to alleviate food
insecurity. Investing in agriculture has great potential for creating employment, reducing food prices
and alleviating poverty. Although commercial agricultural is more effective in increasing national food
production and feeding more people, subsistence agriculture remains important. Subsistence
agriculture directly provides to households with food and also enables them to divert income to meet
other household needs. However, to remain viable small scale farmers require adequate support
services.
The food security paradox in South Africa is likely to remain if no major shifts in policy implementation
are made. The NDP provides a clear framework of where efforts must be directed in order to address
food security. What remains to be seen is the commitment of stakeholders and ability to implement
relevant programmes that eliminates the key drivers of food insecurity.
35
5.1 Recommendations
The lessons gathered from this research that donors should consider in making decisions on which
CSI interventions to fund in agriculture and food security are listed and discussed below.
Donors should increasingly shift funding from food relief programmes to training and
skills development interventions
The need for food relief remains a reality for some households, owing to persistent high
levels of poverty and unemployment in rural areas and urban informal settlements. However,
provision of food relief packages is not sustainable in the long term. In order to bring about
systemic change, donors should increase their investment in parallel interventions that
empower households by enabling them to either produce their own food or increase their
ability to purchase adequate and nutritious food. Households should be engaged in training
and skills development programmes so that they cease to be passive recipients of food relief.
Promote initiatives that promote gender equity in agriculture and food security sector
Although more women are involved in agriculture and are responsible for food preparation at
a micro-level, they have limited access to training in the sector. Improving the level of
knowledge and skills in farming among women is likely to boost household productivity
resulting in reduced vulnerability to food insecurity. It is possible that funding programmes that
support women in agriculture is likely to lead to higher social return on investment.
Support the design and implementation of educational programmes linked to
community development
Although higher education institutions are mandated to conduct community work as part of
their responsibilities to society, there are few educational programmes offered to people
resident in communities, especially rural areas. Such programmes create a unique
opportunity for development practitioners, academics and communities to share their
knowledge while facilitating educational outcomes for students. Such programmes are crucial
in transferring knowledge (and skills) to participating households and community workers
complementing government programmes in unlocking potential to develop self-sufficient
communities. Although implementing educational programmes of this nature is complex,
there is evidence that the benefits are enormous. Therefore, donors should consider funding
similar programmes or pilot more innovative initiatives with a view to engage government for
the purposes of scaling up proven models in the long term.
Support the use of technology in improving monitoring and evaluation of food
security programmes
Assessing impact of interventions remains a major challenge among CSI and government-
funded programmes alike. There are various reasons for this, including the lack of baseline
surveys at programme inception, poor data collection skills that yield data of poor quality and
failure or unwillingness to budget for programme evaluation. Given the proliferation of
technology applications in various sectors, some programmes have started experimenting
with technology and piloting real time data collection. Early indications are that programme
staff are able to make timely decisions based on real-time data and that the cost of data
collection is reduced by the use of such technology. Donors should, therefore promote the
use of technology to improve programme monitoring and evaluation of their initiatives.
Engage in structured public-private partnerships to optimise impact
The enormity of food insecurity in the country requires significant collaboration between and
among stakeholders. While donors are able to pilot innovative interventions in in agriculture
36
and food security, such interventions must be aligned with national programmes and
priorities. While government has a robust structure and framework for scaling up
programmes nationally they often have poor coordination skills. Through public-private
partnerships the resultant pooling of resources, expertise and networks is likely to increase
the efficiency and effectiveness of interventions in addressing food insecurity.
The public-private partnerships must be based on common or complementary priorities with
clear roles and responsibilities to ensure efficient implementation of programmes. There are
various business skills that may be brought into the partnership, especially with regards to
strategic planning, programme implementation and coordination. The actual programmes
should be based on evidence, having been piloted and evaluated to demonstrated efficacy.
The partnerships should always be driven by social and economic gains for the wider
population.
Support small-scale commercial farmers linked to the business supply chain
There are various opportunities for donors to support small-scale agriculture. Current
programmes focus on linking the farmers with retail markets and supply produce through
contract farming arrangements. There are still numerous opportunities to provide technical
training and support to small-scale farmers, agri-business management and funding
infrastructure development in order to increase productivity. These opportunities offer win-
win outcomes, especially if the donor has business that extends to the farming sector and
farmers can be located on the food supply chain.
37
Appendix 1: Research approach and methodology
A. Research Approach
This research relied primarily on literature review on agriculture, food security and nutrition,
quantitative data and qualitative information gathered through interviews with organisations
implementing food security initiatives in rural and urban communities. Information on specific
programmes was collected through in-depth interviews and the case study approach.
B. Research Methods and Process
Desktop Research
Desktop research was conducted to gain an understanding of the multi-dimensional nature of food
security. The literature review highlighted food security concepts, the state of food security in South
Africa demonstrating the paradox of national food security and household food insecurity, the link
between food security and nutrition, agriculture and food gardens in rural and urban contexts and the
impact of food prices and inflation on household food security. The literature review also highlighted
government responses to food security through various initiatives and policies.
WesBank National Partners’ Workshop
The study benefited from a two-day workshop on the Food Security and Livelihoods Programme
funded by WesBank. The workshop brought together various NGOs and partners implementing
various interventions in agriculture in general and food gardens in particular. The workshop provided
an opportunity to engage with participants with specific knowledge on food security. The workshop
highlighted the significance of programme planning, monitoring and evaluation in order to implement
high impact programmes. Finally, the workshop provided valuable leads that resulted in the case
studies profiled in this report.
In-depth Interviews
An initial in-depth interview was conducted within Tshikululu with the CRM for the WesBank Fund
responsible for the Food Security and Livelihoods Programme. Based on insights and suggestions
emanating from the interview, subsequent in-depth interviews were conducted with individuals in
selected organisations managing or implementing food security programmes.
Case Studies
Based on the interactions with various organisations implementing food security programmes, four
were identified and included in the research report as case studies. These are: Abalimi Bezekhaya,
Tiger Brands Foundation, Mineworkers Development Agency and the UNISA Household Food
Security Programme. Abalimi was included on the basis of their individual and community approach to
food gardens and their innovation in linking micro-farmers to consumers to generate income. Tiger
Brands Foundation’s in-school feeding programme was selected to highlight the importance of food
security to education and how public private partnerships can be leveraged to benefit society. The
MDA Integrated Food Security Programme was included to demonstrate the mining sector’s response
to retrenchments and subsequent social and economic challenges of ex-miners. Finally, the UNISA
Household Food Security Programme was included to show how tertiary institutions can engage with
communities in an effort to bring knowledge and education to them.
The case studies are intended to showcase lessons learnt and guide CSI entities in making decisions
concerning supporting agriculture and food security programmes.
