Synthesis of discussants' remarks

Large farms are typically more competitive than their smaller counterparts and it was noted that they accrue significant amounts of government support. This public support, for example in the form of direct income transfers or market interventions, played a major role in enhancing their competitiveness vis-à-vis small farms and non-farm enterprises. The transition process from small to large farms, however, necessarily involves policies that increasingly support and protect smallholders. What implications does this hold for government support of large farms?

The transition from small to large farms needs to be carefully examined in land-scarce countries like Bangladesh, India, Indonesia or China. With large proportions of the population involved in small-scale farming, the transition would require absorbing millions of released workers into rural non-farm or urban industries. This is unrealistic due to both demand and supply side constraints – experience has shown the Lewisian process to have worked only in a handful of countries.

Government support for effective poverty reduction is still required as there are market failures in many developing countries. Technology, extension services and credit need to be delivered by the government in such situations. Partnerships of governments and NGOs can be a plausible solution for doing this.

Linking smallholders to reliable markets is of utmost importance. Markets with high price volatilities are unreliable and are a big concern for small farmers both as producers and consumers. Better adaptation to climate change and access to technology can partly address how to handle market volatilities. Of further concern is that value-chain analysis of micro-finance reveals high interest rates (of the order of 30-40 percent). While normally held as empowering small-scale farmers, this can only be accommodated by short-term trade and not in a sustainable manner.

Despite the noted importance of commercializing entire value-chains, it was also argued that this may not always be the best solution. A large proportion of smallholder farmers will be left out of the scope of commercialization, such as those smallholders who are net food buyers, not to mention implications for landless and near-landless people. Nonetheless, it may still be possible to shift a large proportion from subsistence to commercial small-scale farming.

In terms of governance, a rights-driven people-centric approach is effective for dealing with smallholder agriculture. The NREGA in India is a good example of small farmers participating in labour policy and building infrastructure. Also, collective action in the institutional dimension holds tremendous potential for implementing policies. In the realm of global policy-making, there was a suggestion for developing a social policy interface, perhaps in an ILO-IFAD conclave, that is based on a labour/people-centric framework of broader human development.

The increasing feminization of smallholder farming adds complexity to the gender dimension of linkages to markets and gender issues need to be at the forefront of discussion. Women’s participation in value chains, including access to technology and adaptation to climate change, need to be assessed.

Regarding sustainability, energy sustainability must be considered alongside land and water. Challenges arising from fossil fuel scarcity need more attention. If there is significant potential for capitalizing on renewable energy by small scale farmers, it should be investigated.

The definition of small farmers emerged as a contentious issue. The proposed 2 hectare cut-off  means that two-third of smallholders in the world exist in only two countries, India and China, and the majority of them are largely subsistence farmers. Apprehension was raised over the narrowness of the definition, and whether it can be effectively used to target smallholders for commercialization.

Finally, concern was raised over the increasing privatization of agricultural research. This access of smallholder farmers to findings is limited and the research is generally not directed towards small scale production. Without access to research and technology, it is difficult for smallholders to multiply their outputs and emerge as sustainable farm enterprises.