Role of Policies, Stakeholder Programs and Interventions in Agricultural Diversification among Smallholder Farmers: A Case of Lilongwe District in Malawi

Abstract

Globally, governments and agricultural organizations implement policies and programs reflected in interventions such as input subsidies, extension services for modern inputs and training, which either enable or hinder agricultural diversification. A study was carried out from 2016 to 2019 in Lilongwe district, Malawi, to determine the influence of policies, programs and interventions on agricultural diversification. The study was using a mixed-method sequential explanatory design. It involved a literature review, interviews with 424 male and female smallholder farmers, 35 demonstration plots on agricultural diversification, 27 focus group discussions with farmers, and 17 key informant interviews with stakeholder representatives. The literature review showed that the 2016 Malawi agricultural policy already prioritized agricultural diversification as it included a policy statement and policy objective on agricultural diversification. This study found that stakeholders, namely the Ministry of Agriculture, Total Land Care, National Smallholder Farmers Association of Malawi, School of Agriculture for Family Independence, and Trustees of Agriculture Promotion Program, were promoting agricultural diversification. They did it by (i) organizing farmers into groups for agricultural diversification activities, (ii) provision of extension advice, and (iii) providing inputs for different crops as well as livestock either for free, on pass-on, or through loans. However, interventions were on small scale, had not fully addressed hindrances to agricultural diversification, were mostly supply-driven, and the interventions themselves faced sustainability-threatening problems such as failure to pass on livestock and seeds. The agricultural policy was thus not sufficiently translated into widespread programs and interventions to foster improvement in agricultural diversification. As such, we suggest re-channeling of funding from promoting mono-cropping to agricultural diversification by broadening the crop and livestock focus of advisory services, enabling farmer organization initiatives and community engagement for farmers to solve most diversification challenges on their own.

Keywords

• diversification promotion
• intervention challenges
• policy impact