MOROCCO

ROLE OF AGRICULTURESYNTHESIS REPORT

Comments by DiscussantGregory Lazarev

22/10/03

A valuable and new kind of report in the Moroccan context

• Referring to many other reports on agriculture in Morocco, this report brings a new vision of agriculture within its overall context. It departs from the usual sectoral/subsectoral approaches

• It provides an integrated and dynamic vision. This is, in particular, the result of a fruitful interconnection of the analysis and lessons from the diverse ROA modules

• The study innovates with the introduction of evaluation tools which are generally ignored in this kind of studies in Morocco (hedonistic prices model and contingent evaluation to measure externalities on environment, measurable general equilibrium model to asses poverty, new simulation models of projected economic effects, focus groups interviews to evaluate actors perceptions, etc.)

I would retain 6 important lessons

• The study results demonstrates the appropriateness of the ROA methodology• Roles of agriculture as described by the diverse modules are clearly

interdependent. The report enlights the fact that, as a result, development policies are compelled to be integrated, global, holistic

• A number of effects/externalities are conflicting. Trade offs are possible depending on priorities. These seem to put forward the reduction of rural poverty which is at the root of most distorting effects on food security, internal market expansion, environment sustainability, rural-urban unbalance.

• Uncontrolled liberalization and market forces alone cannot provide an adequate response and are likely to worsen a number of undesirable effects. There seems to be a very strong justification for public aid, targeted protection and regulatory government policies.

• Agriculture is diverse, there is a need for a "territorialization" of agricultural policies according to regional potentialities, and for targeted policies according to the farming systems diversification.

• Maximization of effects and of trade offs negotiations between conflicting objectives require a participation and "responsibilization" of rural and non rural actors.

The report however does not end with its conclusions. It stimulates questions which open new avenues to further explore the role of agriculture. I would concentrate on 6 questions

Question 1. What should be the field of "agriculture" in terms of population? From agricultural population to rural

population? Agricultural and rural population which used to fully coincide, are not to be confounded nowadays (following a general historical tendency in the world). Some 40% of rural households in Morocco are either very marginal farmers or non farming families. These stay in rural areas but depend on labor mobility and mostly on non agricultural revenues: Economically, this means significant financial transfers from non agricultural sectors to the rural sector. This has also an impact on large cities as workforce living outside these towns generate indirect savings in urban costs that would account, should this labor force move definitively to towns (this could be seen as a kind of buffer function). Migration to towns of this labor force would have an enormous social effect while the transfer of their lands to larger farmers would not change the land tenure balance, given the very small aggregated area of the micro-farms. When rural areas are better equipped, they starts to have a recognized comparative advantage (cheaper housing, family help, stronger social ties, identity pride thanks to land ownership - even when plots are minimal, etc.). This seems to indicate a tendency for a new "rurality", gradually more articulated with urban amenities. Parallel with Tunisia where seriously improved rural equipment results in attaching the mobile workforce to these areas and in inducing higher monetary transfers. Same tendency in Sahelian Africa for a growing mobile rural based workforce. In China, managing such a tendency is called "urban led rural development". Parallel with Europe, although on a different basis. This seems to demonstrate that, from a population standpoint, there is a need to encompass the rural sector and population as a whole.

Question 2. What is the geographical field of "agriculture"? Would it not be the

time to introduce a concept of "rural space"?

Agriculture in Morocco (and this is true in most of developing countries contexts) does not limit to farmed areas. With variable intensities (according to the density of the farmed area) it encompasses most of the environment components. Farmers and pastoralists use forests, range lands far beyond farms limits. This is a dominant feature in the most extended production systems, those based on agro-pastoralism, semi-arid rainfed agriculture, etc. This leads to the concept of rural space. Is ROA ready to agree that dealing with agriculture would also mean dealing with most of environmental aspects and issues of the so-called "rural space"?

Question 3. Will the role of farmers in environment evolve with time?

Over centuries, farmers have managed the environment. Pressures have led them to destructive practices and behaviors. New rural generations are less and less concerned by the environmental values. In the meantime, environment is becoming a more and more important patrimony asset of the whole society. Its functions are multiple, among which water production and regulation (inducing protection of the vegetal cover erosion control), landscape and biodiversity values, potential basis to meet a future demand for residence and "recreative" spaces, etc.. Such a patrimony cannot be managed in a sustainable way without farmers involvement and cooperation. How to turn present tendencies from destructive behaviors to that of responsible environment users and managers? This question opens on new roles of the farmers. But would renewed environmental management practices also produce income likely to motivate them to turn to new functions and roles? Better management of natural resources, rural tourism, landscape as shown by the Morocco report (also the Dominican case for rural tourism) seem to demonstrate that such activities or demands are part of the answer. But would this be enough? Environment is a societal asset (and also as proposed by P Warren a "cultural public good"). This has a cost for the society as a whole. How should we consider the economics of this problem?

Question 4. How policies are affected by dualism?

Dualism is another major feature of the rural/agricultural sector. in Morocco. This is not explicitely stated by the report but this can be permanently read between lines. (areas with and without potential, semi-subsistence and commercial farming, well-beings and poors, rural and urban).. Perceptions of agriculture and of the rural, as shown by report, are contradictory but these opposite views have to be seen as a true reflection of the dual aspects of the rural sector. The report rightly insists on the need to differenciate and adjust to this reality. But adjustments also imply conflict resolution (good examples of conflicting effects are given in the report). There is, so far, a strong need to investigate further this kind of implications

Question 5. How to reconcile Government budgetary support to

poverty policies with the liberalization trend?

The need for such a support, clearly demonstrated by the report, comes at a time when main thrusts are for accelerating free trade. How can this be achieved with graduality, what kind of safety nets are at hands of government?

Question 6. Could research on the role of agriculture avoid being extended to the

whole problem of integrated rural development?

Agriculture has multiple functions and it has to play a crucial role in rural poverty alleviation and environment management. But in turn, it is dependant on the efficiency of many other macro and sectoral policies. This is very well demonstrated by the Morocco report which shows that there is an overall priority for integrated rural development. Implications have to be understood and supported by appropriate policies as such a global approach calls for a lot of interrelated concerns: rural actors responsibilization, appropriate decentralization and local governance, equipment of rural areas, efficient "territory planning", intermediate urbanization policies, etc. All these policies implications sum up in a concept which is gaining more and more importance, that of local development. How the role of agriculture fit, into such a framework?