AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRYIN ZAMBIAPRESENT SITUATION AND ISSUESFOR DEVELOPMENT

March
2008




AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY IN ZAMBIA:PRESENT SITUATION AND ISSUES FOR DEVELOPMENT

JAPAN ASSOCIATION FOR INTERNATIONAL COLLABORATIONOF AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY
3F Akasaka KSA Bldg., 8-10-39 Akasaka,
Minato-ku, Tokyo, 107-0052 Japan
Tel: +81 - 3 - 5772- 7880
Fax: +81 - 3 - 5772 - 7680

PREFACE
This study report is the Zambian version of the series of “country studies” published by the
Association.
In order to effectively implement the agricultural and forestry development overseas, whenvarious cooperation projects are planned and formulated, it is indispensable to precisely acknowledge
the politics, economy, society, nature and culture of the country concerned, and needed to correctly
understand the issues for economic and social development of the country.
The current series of studies intend, in sorting out the present situation of economy and society ofdeveloping countries, and their issues agricultural forestry and food situation, to specify the role ofJapan in cooperation and its future direction concerning the subject countries.
In this version, among the African countries, which have increasingly become important as thetarget to the official development assistance of Japan, the Republic of Zambia is selected and studied.
Zambia is one of the least developing countries where agriculture is the major industry, the poverty
ratio as high as 70% and the ratio of population of under-nutrition as high as 50%, thus requires apriority effort from onward. In undertaking this study project, the Association dispatched a survey
team to the country for purposes of collecting more precise and up-to-date information and materials,
and in Japan, in establishing a research committee within the Association, examined the study details
from the expertise points of view.
This report much owes to contributions of the authors led by Prof. Kazuo Hanzawa (The Nippon
University) and efforts of the members of research committee. I wish to express my sincere thanks forthem. I also extend my appreciation to all officials concerned in the Government of Zambia, theMinistry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries of Japan, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan, andthe Japan International Cooperation Agency.

March 2008
Hidero Maki
President
Japan Association for International Collaborationof Agriculture and Forestry


Source: Compiled by Soil Survey Unit, Mount Makulu Central Research Station

Fig.1 Agro-Ecological Regions of Zambia

Source: Compiled by Soil Survey Unit, Mount Makulu Central Research Station

Fig.2 Soil Types of Zambia.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Preface
Chapter 1

Trend of Agriculture and Forestry Development ····························································· 1

1. Current Situation of Agricultural Production ················································································ 1(1) Natural conditions ················································································································· 1(2) Agro-ecological regions ········································································································ 1(3) Soil distribution and their relations to agro-ecological regions ············································· 2(4) Land utilization and agricultural production situation ···························································· 9(5) Agricultural productivity and income level of farmers ··························································· 28
2. Prospect of Agricultural Development ·························································································· 31(1) Food crops····················································································································· ·········· 31(2) Export crops ··················································································································· ········· 32(3) Direction of agricultural development ···················································································· 33
3. Present Situation and Issues of Forests and Forestry······································································ 35(1) Overall situation of forests ······································································································ 35(2) Ownership and holding of forests ··························································································· 36(3) Management and utilization of forest resources······································································ 36(4) Issues of forests and forestry··································································································· 37
4. Development Goals and Position of Agriculture and Forestry ······················································· 38(1) Economic development plans ································································································ 38(2) Agricultural development plans ···························································································· 40(3) Forestry development plans ·································································································· 41
Chapter 2

Present Situation and Trend of Cooperation for the Development of Agriculture
and Forestry ·················································································································· ·· 46

1. Present Situation of Cooperation for Development ······································································ 46(1) Cooperation of bilateral and multilateral donors/ organizations ············································· 46(2) Cooperation of Japan ·············································································································· 55
2. Direction of International Cooperation ························································································· 60(1) Issues of agriculture and forestry development······································································· 60(2) Direction of Japanese cooperation ························································································ 61
References ···················································································································· ······················· 63

CHAPTER 1 TREND OF AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY㩷 㩷 㩷 㩷 㩷 㩷 㩷 㩷 㩷 㩷 㩷 DEVELOPMENT
1.

Current Situation of Agricultural Production(1) Natural conditions
While Zambia is located in the tropical climatic zone, the area in high above sea level (in therange of 900-1500 meters), excluding the basins of the Zambezi, Luangwa and Kafue Rivers, and thearea around Lake Tanganyika, Lake Mweru and Lake Bangwelu, is relatively cool. Droughts caused
by low rainfall and, vice versa, floods by high rainfall take place. The season with the highest
temperature is the month of October. The rainy season spreads from November/December to around
April, and the dry season from around May to around November. The average annual rainfall amounts
to around 1,000 mm, but varies by regions. The rainfall in the south and southwest regions is around
900 mm, but in the north and northwest regions it exceeds over 1,400 mm. After the cool season from
May to mid-August, the temperature rises. In the capital Lusaka, the minimum and maximum averagetemperatures in July are respectively 9㷄 and 23㷄, those in January respectively 17㷄 and 26㷄, andthe annual average rainfall in the normal year is 810 mm.
Within 75 million hectares of the total land area, some 42 million hectares with the annual rainfall
ranging from 800 to 1,400 mm have the medium to high potentials for agriculture. Yet the actual
acreage under utilization at present is limited to only 14 %1䋩. However within the unused area a
reduction of forest area would lead to destroy the natural environment, thus the extent of its
transformation to farmland should be carefully examined.
The total population in 2000 was 9.9 million, in which urban population accounted for 35 %.
According to the World Bank, the estimated population in 2006 accounts to 11.9 million. In thecontext of Zambian agriculture, such elements as a low population density (14 persons per square km),a relatively high ratio of urban population and the mining biased economy since the colonial era areimportant.

(2) Agro-ecological regions
The agro-ecology of Zambia is roughly divided into three regions according to the rainfall andsoil characters (reference: Fig.1 of the frontispiece). The following is the general features of thesethree regions. Details of soil characters are explained in the later section.
A.

Region I
The Region with less than 800 mm of annual rainfall accounts for 12 % of the total land area. The

total acreage amounts to 17.3 million hectares, the smallest among the three regions. The region
includes: the arid zone covering South Province, East Province, the Gwembe Valley of Central
Province, and the semi-arid zone of West and South Provinces. The planting season of crops is short㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㪈㧕
Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives, National Agriculture Policy 2004-2015, 2004, p.1㩷 normally in the range of 80-120 days. Accordingly it is suitable for growing such the drought resisting
crops as millet1䋩, sorghum2䋩, sesame and cotton. With irrigation, however, maize can be cultivatedeven in dry season. The region is also suitable for raising cattle, while the cultivation of cassava islimited. The valley area along the Zambezi River is lowland, consequently the temperature andhumidity are high. Due to the habitat of tsetse flies, cattle raising is not feasible.
B.

Region II
The Region is located at the center of the country, and includes Western Province, Central

Province and Eastern Province and a part of Northern Province. Total acreage amounts to about 27.4
million hectares, accounting for 42 % of the total national acreage, ranking at the second among thethree regions. From the aspect of agricultural uses, the soil appears most fertile. The annual rainfall is
800-1000 mm and no freezing even during the low temperature season. The crop planting period is for
100-140 days.
Region II is further divided into II-a and II-b Sub-Regions. The II-a Sub-Region is located in thefertile plateau covering the four provinces of Central, Lusaka,㩷 Southern and Eastern, generally withthe original fertile soil. There the sedentary agriculture develops, and such various crops as maize,
cotton, tobacco, sunflower, soybean, groundnut and wheat by irrigation are planted. The area is also
suitable for flowers and vegetable production like paprika.
The Sub-Region II-b is included in Western Province, where sandy soil is predominant. The area
is suitable for the production of cashew nut, rice, cassava, millet, vegetables, timbers, and livestock
production like beef, dairy and poultry.
C.

Region III
The Region is one of the highest rainfall areas with the average annual rainfall of 1,000-1,500

mm. The period suitable for crop production is 120-150 days. The region accounts for 46 % of thewhole national acreage, and covers Northern Province, Luapula Province, Copperbelt Province, themost part of Northwest Province, and a part of Central Province. Except Copperbelt Province, the soilin the Region is in an advanced stage of leaching and acidification, yet in applying the lime it can beused as farmland. It is suitable for the production of millet, cassava, sorghum, beans and groundnut.
Coffee, sugarcane, rice and pineapple are also planted. The stream water without interruption
throughout the year can be utilized for small-scale irrigation. Development of freshwater fish andaquaculture are also expected.

(3) Soils distribution and their relations to agro-ecological regions
In this section, soils distribution in Zambia, their relations to geology (parent materials), theagro-ecological regions are described. Also, their properties, geographical distribution and various㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㪈㧕
Millet is general term of the grass family (Poaceae) plants, similar to common millet (Panicum Miliaceum),
including such as pearl millet and finger millet.
㪉㧕Sorghum is a generic term of the African millet genus of the grass family, called as African millet, kaoliang andothers.
㩷 crops suitability are described and finally the area of each soil type is shown and soil fertility
information at present using the GIS (Geographic Information Systems) technology is briefly
reviewed.
A. Major soil properties and their distribution related to agro-ecological regions
Soils in Zambia have been formed from a great diversity of parent materials. However, thecharacteristics and distribution of the soils are largely influenced by climate particularly rainfall.
Zambia lies roughly between latitudes 8°and 18°south of the equator.

Zambia experiences

strongly clear rainy and dry seasons, the rainy season starts October in the north and November in thesouth and lasts to April and March respectively. Mean annual rainfall exceeds 1100mm in thewestern part of Northern and the northern part of North-Western Provinces, decreasing southward to
Southern Province, only 700mm in southeastern margin of the country. Mean annual temperatures
range between 19䋭22㷄 except in the major river valleys of Zambezi, Luangwa and Luapula.
Zambia ranges roughly between 600m and 2000m in the elevation, and it consists of level togently undulating plateau except the escarpments zones which divide the middle Zambezi andLuangwa valleys. Geomorphology of Zambia has shown the first four legends as Montane Zone,
Central African Plateau, Escarpment Zone and Rift Trough1 䋩 , respectively.

The latter two

topographical features show the elevation from transitional to lower one.
Zambia is underlain by a wide range of rock types. Except the Kalahari system that has been
formed from the Tertiary to recent period and has covered the west and north-west side of the country,
such igneous rocks as granite, gabbro and others in various ages probably older than the Pre-Cambrianperiod, and the Basement complex which consisted of ancient crystalline rocks like schist, gneiss,
quartzite and migmatite in the Pre-Cambrian period formed the Central African Plateau in the north,east and south-east side of the country.㩷 In the south-west, west and north-west side of the country,
such sedimentary rocks as shale, sandstone, mudstone and limestone in the Katanga system, and in theeast, south-east side of the country, lava (basalt), marl, sandstone and others in the Karroo system bothfrom the Lower Paleozoic to the Mesozoic periods also formed the stable land blocks overlying theBasement Complex. These systems and the Complex accompanied by repeated folding andmetamorphism through the geological ages have altered the original of the rocks, followed by theirslow protrusion, erosion and weathering, various types of soils were formed.
Having these climatic, topographical and geological background factors, Agro-Ecological Regionof Zambia is shown in Fig. 1 of the frontispiece.
The agro-ecological region is divided into three regions (㸇to 㸉) by different amounts of rainfall
and region㸈is subdivided into㸈a and㸈b by differences of soils. The soil types appearing in thissub-section are described later in the next sub-section for their characteristics and distribution.
㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㪈㧕
Rift Trough is distinguished from the Great Rift Valley. According to D.B.Dalal-Clayton et al. (1985), the rift
trough is observed in the Luangwa valley and middle Zambezi valley. These are not considered to be true rift
valley since they are hinged along their south-eastern escarpments.㩷 The escarpments at north-western side aremuch more precipitous than those to the south east. However, the south eastern flank of Luangwa valley,
although not obviously a faulted boundary, does sharply demarcates the boundary between the Basement
Complex rocks of the Central African Plateau and much younger Karroo sediments of the valley floor.
㩷 In region㸉, the annual rainfall exceeds 1000mm and the soils are highly weathered and strongly
leached. In the medium rainfall area (800-1000mm), the central and eastern parts of Zambia, suchfertile soils as Luvisols, Acrisols and Vertisols cover the region㸈a, while in the western parts infertile
Arenosols and seasonally water logged Gleysols cover the region㸈b.
Although the parent materials are similar, soils in region㸈 show moderate weathering andleaching as compared to soils in region 㸉. For example, limestones, dolomites and mudstones in the
Paleozoic period in region 㸉 generally form well drained, deep red, clayey soils (Ferralsols),
in region㸈 they develop into Lixisols and Luvisols.

while

Similarly, acidic rocks form highly leachedsoils with lower pH and lower mineral contents in region 㸉, while in region㸈 moderately leachedsoils with medium mineral contents are formed.
In the low rainfall zone (400-800mm), region㸇, the soils are slightly weathered and moderately
to non-leached. Generally, influences of rainfall on soil formation become less in region㸇, however,
Kalahari sands, unconsolidated sandstones or limestone formed since the Tertiary period and covering
widely the western part, are strongly leached and acidic soils. Soils profiles are less developed.
B.

Zambian soil classification system
Soils Map of Zambia on the scale of 1: 5million was published in 1983 and it was correlated to

the Soil Taxonomy (Soil Survey Staff, 1975).

At the same time, more than 350 soil series wererecognized although their numbers are expected to increase hereafter by further soil survey. However,
it is not correlated yet with the Revised Soil Taxonomy (Soil Survey Staff, 1999).
Soil Survey Unit of Mt. Makulu had published an Exploratory Soil Map of Zambia on the scale of
1:1,000,000 in 1991 which was printed in 1999, and this is referred to the National Soil Map.

In itssoil classification system, the revised soil map of world legend (FAO-Unesco 1988) was used todescribe the soil units. Furthermore, the map was digitized in order to establish the geographic
information systems, GIS.

However, the classification is not fully correlated yet with World

Reference Base (ISSS/ISRIC/FAO 1998).
In this article, soils are described according to the revised soil map of world legend in 1988 andsome reference lists regarding the soil classification system are omitted.
Main soil types distributed in Zambia expressed as soil units by the legend of FAO/Unesco areshown in Fig.2 of the frontispiece.

Overviews of main soil types, their characteristics, crop

suitability and geographical distribution are given in this sub-section.
(i)

Acrisols, Ferralsols
The major part of the country is covered with Acrisols and Ferralsols. These soils are highly

weathered and strongly leached and are thus infertile soils, characterized by weakly structured, loamy
top soils, clayey sub soils. Ferralsols are easy to form stable structures due to the clay properties. The
major difference between the two soils is that Ferralsols generally tend to have a uniform texture
throughout the profile while Acrisols display a marked clay increase with depth. Top soil textures ofAcrisols show loamy sand or sandy loam while Ferralsols show clayey textures.
The cation exchange capacity (CEC) of Acrisols is less than 24 meq / 100g clay (the weight unit,㩷 

100g clay is abbreviated hereafter) and the base saturation is less than 50%1䋩.

Soil pH (CaCl2) ranges

4䋭4.5, moderately to strongly acid (CaCl2 is abbreviated hereafter). Soils are unsuitable to most crops
largely due to low soil nutrients levels. However with regular liming and careful fertilization the soils
are moderately suitable for maize, sorghum, groundnuts, cassava, sunflower, millet and coffee.
Ferralsols are less fertile than Acrisols. The CEC is less than 16meq and base saturation is low.
Soil pH is strongly acid with values less than 4.5. Phosphorous deficiency and Al toxicity of crops areprominent.
These soils occur widely in region㸉 occupying large parts of Northern, Luapula, Copperbelt andNorth-Western Provinces.
Acrisols in region㸈 cover large parts of the plateau in Central and Eastern Provinces and Tonga
plateau in Southern Province, however, reduced rainfall in this region may adversely affect theirsuitability to agriculture.
(ii)

Lixisols, Luvisols, Alisols
The second important soils are Lixisols, Luvisols and Alisols.

These soils are also infertile andhighly weathered, strongly leached like Acrisols, however, they differ from Ferralsols and Acrisols intheir chemical properties. This group of soil is generally gravelly and usually overlying an ironstonelayer.
Lixisols are highly weathered and moderately leached but with base saturation of more than 50%.
Having a better nutrient supply, they are important maize and tobacco soils of Central Province.
Luvisols are slightly weathered and moderately leached and thus fertile soils with higher CEC (䋾24meq ) and higher base saturation(䋾50%). These soils are better suited to most crops.

Alisols aremoderately weathered and strongly leached with higher CEC (䋾24meq ) and thus fertile.
These three soils predominate in region㸈a.

Acrisols, together with some Lixisols that display

abrupt clay increase between A-horizon and B-horizon have been referred to “sandveldt’’ soils.

In

Eastern Province, Acrisols extend from Petauke east to Lundazi. Occupying a large tract of land inCentral Province they occur in the Kafue national park south-west of Mumbwa.
Southern Province were described before.
districts of Central Province.

Occurrences in

Lixisols widely occur both in Mumbwa and Kafue

Luvisols occupy the plateau areas of Southern and Eastern Provinces.

They are found in Mazabuka, Magoye and Macha areas in Southern Province.

In Eastern Province

the soils are Ukwimi area of Petauke district, Kalichero and Chiparamba area of Chipata district.
Alisols are common in the plateau areas of Chipata, Katete and Chadiza districts of Eastern Province.
(iii)

Phaeozems, Nitisols, Cambisols
Closely related to the above mentioned group of soils are Phaeozems, Nitisols and Cambisols.

The former two soils are relatively fertile and occur in a small area of region㸈a and㸇.
Phaeozems have dark coloured top soils associated with high contents of organic carbon, and㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㪈㧕
FAO fixes the boundary lines for such luvic soils with agric horizons as Alisols, Acrisols, Luvisols andLixisols; 24meq for CEC and 50% for base saturation.㩷
㩷 relatively strong structures that are not both massive and hard or very hard when dry. The soils arefound in Nyimba area of Eastern Province and Chisamba area in Central Province.
Nitisols are characterized by texture of more than 30% clay throughout the profile and moderate
structures that show shiny ped surfaces. Such locally minor occurrences are in Makeni area of Lusaka
Province.
Cambisols are slightly weathered soils with a weak or medium profile development without any
argic horizons and are generally shallower and gravelly. The soils occupy large tracts of land in the
Luangwa valley in region㸇. The soils are suited to drought resistant crops such as sorghum andcassava.
(iv)

Arenosols, Podozols
The fourth important group of soils is Arenosols and Podozols. These soils are very infertile andhave sandy textures with little or no profile development associated with the Kalahari sand deposits.
Soil pH is less than 4.0, strongly acid reaction. The nutrient retention capacity is very low and this also
makes the land very low agricultural potential. Soils are marginally suitable for cassava.
With regular liming and fertilizer application, the soils may support maize, sorghum, beans,groundnuts, cassava and millet. Podozols are also sandy and strongly acid soils with sub-horizons
continuously cemented by combinations of organic matter with iron or aluminum or both. These soils
are confined to Western Province and some parts of North-Western Province.
(v)

Leptosols, Regosols
Leptsols include shallow soils less than 50cm deep. The main characteristic is the limited soil

depth. These occur as resistant hills and ridges on the plateau while they appear as escarpments in atransition zone between the plateau (region㸈a) and the Rift Trough of Luangwa, Zambezi and
Gwembe valleys (region㸇). Also the soils occur in region 㸉 like in every southern parts of Luapula,
North-Western and Copperbelt Provinces.

The soils are unsuitable for most agricultural crops due tosevere limitations which include rootability and high aluminum toxicity. The soils may be used forranching if slopes are not very steep. However, the soils occur in a large area of the country and shown
later.
Regosols are fine textured soils formed from unconsolidated materials and with very little soil
development. These soils occupy large tracts of land in the central parts of the Kafue National Park.
Their suitability to agriculture, like that of Leptosols is very poor.
(vi)

Wetland soils
In this article, other soils are summarized as wetland soils for discussion.
Low-wetland includes floodplains, swamps, marshes, lakes littoral and so-called dambos. It is

assumed that the wetland habitat areas cover approximately 14% of the country surface area.
The wetland soils in Zambia differ greatly in their chemical properties as well as texturalcharacteristics; this being a function of the rock type from which the alluvium is presumed to haveformed. The most important group comprises Gleysols which are very poorly to poorly drained soils㩷 mostly occurring in the dambos and some floodplains. Soils occur in region㸈b.
These soils occur along the Chanbeshi plains, Lake Bangweulu, Lukanga swamps and theBusanga plains both in Luapla and Nortern Provinces. In North-Western Province, they occur insouthern Kasempa district and large parts of Zambezi district.
Some of these soils have sand clay loam topsoil and moderately high organic matter content (1䋭2%). They can have a high nutrient retention capacity and are moderately to slightly acid, pH 4.5䋭5.5.
Those found in floodplains of rivers may even have 䋾50% base saturation, and CEC䋾24meq. The
agricultural potential is low due to poor drainage. They are suited to vegetable cultivation especiallyjust after the rain season.
Vertisols occur in region㸈a and㸇, being secondly important wetland soils. The soils have highamounts of cracking clay ( 䋾30%), their chemical fertility is very high. Their main problem lies inpoor physical properties. They are water logged at sometime during the year and are difficult to work.
They are usually associated with low lying areas.

In region㸈a, these soils occupy large tracts of landin Kafue flats (floodplain) in Central Province and isolated areas of upper Kafue river in Copperbelt
Province.

In region㸇, large tracts of land in Luangwa and Gwembe valleys are also covered withthe soils, however, in this region they assume an important place because of their good ability to holdsoil moisture. Consequently these are soils for small scale farmers in this region. They are used to
grow sorghum in the valley areas.
Fluvisols occur in region㸇and they are stratified soils without or with little profile development
and receiving fresh alluvial deposits regularly. These soils become important soils in the broad leveesof tributary rivers in the Luangwa valley. The agricultural potential is medium due to poor drainage
condition.
Solonetz occur in region㸇and are characterized by the presence of high salt contents in the soil
and by dense subsurface horizon with higher clay content than overlying layers. Exchangeablesodium saturation exceeds more than 15%, forming strongly alkaline soils. These soils occupy large
tracts of land in the Luangwa and Gwembe valleys. These soils have low to moderate agriculturalpotential due to high exchangeable sodium.
Solonchaks are imperfectly to poorly drained, highly saline, strongly structured clayey soils.
They occur in Kaputa area of Northern Province.
Planosols are soils with a coarse textured upper part abruptly overlying slowly permeable subsoil,
and they become important in the Machila river area on the boundary between Southern and Western
Province.
Histosols are soils having a mucky or surface layer of fresh or decomposed organic matter morethan 20cm but less than 40cm thick. These are common in㩷 Western Province. These are often
characterized by periodic flooding and/or water logging which are hindrance to agriculturaldevelopment. The above two types of soils are similarly characterized by periodic flooding.
(vii)

Associations
Although some areas of the associations in Fig.2, ‘Soil types of Zambia’ are less distinguishable,

appreciably a large numbers of area are actually counted.
㩷 

The associations indicate that more than

two types of soils, which follow the definite law, are distributed within any dominant soil type area;
however, these are not mapped due to their small areas and the limited scale of map.
C.

Area of each soil type and the present soil fertility information system
Recently the GIS technology accomplished to calculate the area of each soil type in the map.

First, the results were shown in Table㸈-䋱. The area rate of each soil type was also evaluated.
The Acrisols areas occupy about half of whole areas of the country soils and the Ferralsols area
covered only about one tenth of the Acrisols area.

Areas of Lixisols, fertile soils, occupy about thesame as Ferralsols. Areas of Leptosols in the Escarpment Zone and some parts of region 㸉 show
about two times as large as the area of Arenosols, the Kalahari sand origin.
Second, it can be said that the GIS technology has progressed enough to apply it to the area
distribution of fertility, that is, at present such factors affecting the soil fertility as soil chemical
properties are incorporated into every soil mapping unit. For example, the soil pH map which
divided soil pH of all the country soils into 5 classes was recently developed. This system enabled
people to work out quickly the soil pH at any site within those classes.
It is well known that large tracts of agricultural land, especially soils in region㸉, are deficient inphosphorous to cultivate the main crops like maize. Zinc deficiency of maize is also very common.
However, these constraints of plant nutrition are experienced without any systematic measuresprogramme.
Table 㪠-䋱 Area and area rate of each soil type
Soil Unit
Acrisols
Alisols
Arenosols
Association
Cambisols
Ferralsols
Fluvisols
Gleysols
Histosols
Leptosols
Lixisols
Luvisols
Nitisols
Phaeozems
Planosols
Podzols
Regosols
Solonchaks
Solonetz
Vertisols
Total

Area (km2)
366908.1
787.6
74027.9
51997.2474.831775.4
5292.86044.314586.0
143132.528239.3
1390.0
61.5
521.3
528.4
2694.55212.843.4
6371.1
12779.2

Area %
48.73
0.10
9.83
6.91
0.06
4.22
0.70
0.80
1.94
19.01
3.75
0.18
0.01
0.07
0.07
0.36
0.69
0.01
0.85
1.70

752868.1

100.0

Source: Compiled by Soil Survey Unit, Mount Makulu Central Research Station

In the early 1960’s sulphur problem was given rise to conduct many field trials nationwide. Soon

㩷

 

the results of fields trials legislated for the inclusion of suphur into the compound fertiliser.

However,

there have been few reports on sulphur until the author et al. studied soil sulphur distribution ofZambia by using GIS method. We evaluated the total soil sulphur as well as available soil sulphur
for the maize nutrition, dividing them into 3 classes of sulphur, however, wetland soils were notassessed. As a result, two kinds of sulphur map were presented. For other elements to be drawn theirnational distribution maps, the methodology taken for sulphur will be improved so that the maps
would be available for the efficient and reasonable fertilizer application technology.

(4) Land utilization and agricultural production situation
A.

Production structure of agriculture
The agriculture of Zambia is largely classified into: (a) traditional agriculture mainly for

producing subsistent food; and (b) commercial agriculture basically for commercial production. This
dual structure of agriculture has to be taken in the context of the economic structure formulated during
the colonial era. At that time, the mining industry was the center of the economy, while agriculture
played the secondary role for simply providing the food to mine workers and urban residents. A small
number of large-scale farms managed by settled whites supplied food like maize to the consumers,
while a great number of Africans produced food for their own consumption. Although smallholder
agriculture has developed for last 30 years after the independence, the dual structure, though it haschanged, still remains. On the other hand, the government has recently been encouraging smallholder
farmers to become the outgrowers. This type of agriculture is attracting an attention as a means toresolve the conventional dual structure of agriculture, which is explained in a later section.
Numbers of farms by size in 1990 and 2001 are shown in Table I-2. Moreover, according to theagricultural census held in 1990, among the large-scale farms above 20 hectare, enterprises andgovernment owned (or related) farms accounted for respectively 69 and 4191䋩.
Table I-2㩷 Number of farms by province and by size
Province
CentralCopperbelt
Eastern
LuapulaLusakaNorthern
North-WesternSouthern
Western
Whole country

Small-scale

1990
MediumLarge-scaleless than 5ha

5-20ha41,733
22,680124,862
66,40912,493
81,661
38,89847,29843,683497,717

7,091
1,365
6,699
1,745
696
6,388
849
9,740
4,178
38,751

Above 20ha
859
241
63
52
116
137
41
453
90
2,052

Total
49,683
24,108131,802
68,206
13,30588,18639,78857,491
47,951
520,520

Small-scale

2001
Medium-less than 5ha

5-20ha66,02633,420184,680
106,195
18,604
129,371
49,792
101,744
102,380
792,212

2,511
1,233
3,898
321
326
4,302
213
7,601
323
20,728

Total
68,53734,653
188,578
106,516
18,930133,673
50,005
109,345
102,703
812,940

Source䋺Central Statistical OfficeAccording to the 2000 Census, the total number of farms was about 1.3 million, yet those㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㪈㧕
According to “2002/03 Post Harvest Report for Large-Scale Agricultural Holdings, Central Statistical Office”,
the large-scale holdings were 929.
㩷 

planting crops every year1䋩 are estimated to be a half of them.
Though different from the grouping as shown in Table I-2, small-scale farms (0.5-9 hectares) are
estimated to be 500 to 800 thousand households. These farms apply less external inputs like chemicalfertilizer thus remain at a lower productivity. They also tend to sell the surplus agricultural products
only when cash incomes are required.
Approximately 120,000 emergent farmers and 25,000 medium-scale farms (20-60 hectares)
appear to exist. Large-scale farmers above 60 hectares and enterprise farms altogether account for
2,000. These farms utilize modern inputs, and enjoy a high productivity.
Table I-3 shows the number of farms by province. In terms of farm numbers, Eastern Provinceand Northern Province show a relatively high ratio. Except Lusaka Province and Cupperbelt Province,from the aspect of poverty reduction, it is particularly important to develop agriculture in the remoteareas from consumption centers.
Table I-3㩷 Number of farms by urban and rural areas (2000)
Province
CentralCopperbelt
Eastern
LuapulaLusakaNorthern
North-WesternSouthern
Western
Whole country

Rural
No.
114,32255,730221,683
121,316
30,691200,657
86,880130,535
122,859
1,084,673

䋦
85.9
35.4
95.9
88.8
51.4
91.6
91.1
90.5
95.2
83.1

Urban
No.
䋦
18,787
14.1
101,840
64.6
9,437
4.1
15,23811.2
28,99348.6
18,458
8.4
8,454
8.9
13,666
9.5
6,237
4.8
221,110
16.9

Total
No.
䋦
133,10910.2
157,57012.1
231,120
17.7
136,554
10.5
59,684
4.5
219,115
16.8
95,3347.3
144,20111.0
129,0969.9
1,305,783 100.0

Source䋺2000 Census of Population and Housing

B.

Land utilization
With the increase in population, in other provinces than of Lusaka Province, the state capital, andCopperbelt Province largely of mining cities, the population density has been gradually increasing(Table I-4). Yet in Northern, North-Western and Western Provinces, the population density remains
less than half of the national average.
Table I-4㩷 Population density by province
Province

Acreage(䌫䋛)CentralCopperbelt
Eastern
LuapulaLusakaNorthern
North-WesternSouthern
Western
Whole country

94,39431,328
69,10650,567
21,896
147,826
125,826
85,282
126,386
752,612

1969
1990
2000
1980
Population
Population
Population
Population
Pop. Density
Pop. Density
Pop. Density
Pop. Density
䋨1,000)䋨1,000)䋨1,000)䋨1,000)
359
5.4
512
5.4
721
7.6
1,007
10.1
816
26.1
1,251
39.9
1,427
45.6
1,658
48.8
509
7.4
651
9.4
966
13.9
1,301
17.8
336
6.6
421
8.3
525
10.4
785
14.4
354
16.2
691
31.6
987
45.1
1,432
61.3
545
3.7
675
4.6
855
5.8
1,407
5.8
232
1.8
303
2.4
388
3.1
611
4.3
496
5.6
672
7.9
907
10.6
1,303
13.3
410
3.3
486
3.9
607
4.8
782
5.3
4,057
5.4
5,662
7.5
7,383
9.8
10,285
12.4

Source䋺Central Statistical Office㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㪈㧕
Such farmers are called “professional farmers”.

㩷

 

Main crops of Zambia include maize, cassava, groundnut, millet, sorghum, cotton, sugarcane,sunflower, soybean, wheat, rice and tobacco. Table I-5 shows the planting acreages of major cereal
crops. Dependence on maize as the staple food crop has been high. As stated later, it is likely to beaffected by the government policies biased in favor of maize during the 1970s and the 1980s. In fact,
since the economic reform of 1991, the relative importance of maize has been declining.
(ha)

Table I-5㩷 Planting acreage of major cereal
Year
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007

Maize
609,529
723,087
1,020,574
763,258
639,390661,305
633,326
679,356
520,165
675,565
649,039
510,372
597,454561,491
583,855
575,686
699,276
512,469
704,850
636,609729,050

Sorghum
47,48447,44852,00848,466
31,79040,323
46,56355,24540,36547,83944,68435,86436,65732,504note 130,03330,33747,39057,432
27,836
31,596

Millet43,56944,07347,41658,86945,27066,59852,65482,30275,80976,93085,731
90,047
95,53061,07370,12966,04556,75059,081
63,41164,22256,817

Rice
8,689
10,59312,8099,627
13,45014,36913,802
7,177
9,746
9,888
12,412
9,065
16,121
9,804
14,321
12,927
10,305
12,37918,243
14,35920,067

Wheat
7,387
6,925
9,878
11,595
11,84910,964
13,656
11,566
7,806
10,327
10,693
11,278
9,921
䋭
䋭
䋭
䋭
13,54322,323
4,060
19,188Source: Agricultural Statistics Bulletin
Notes: 1. Deleted as considered as abnormal figures.
2. 䋭䋺No data

Figure I-1 shows the change in the planting acreages of major cereal. Maize acreage decreased
after the peak in the late 1980s, afterward since the mid-2000s it has been moderately recovering. The
acreage of millet, in the expense of maize, expanded, but it leveled off after 2000. The planting
acreages of rice and wheat are in an increasing trend. These changes are regarded as a sign of the
agricultural diversification since the economic liberalization. It may be affected by the improved
economy caused by the price rises of resources like copper.
Figure I-2 shows the changes in the production of major cereal. While similar changes as for theplanting acreages are observed, the increase in rice production is prominent.
Yields per hectares are low throughout all cereal crops (Figure I-3). In the main, the agriculture ofZambia is directly and strongly affected by the climatic conditions such as drought and heavy rainfall,
thus characterized by the considerable annual variation of production. The yield of maize is recognized
to be in a declining trend until the end of 1990s. Afterward it tends to recover, which is regarded to beaffected by the government policies. It is an important issue for future how to improve the yield of
cereal from technical and policy points of view.

㩷

 

Source: Agricultural Statistics Bulletin
Figure I-1 Change in planting acreage of cereal (average 1987-89=100)

Source: Agricultural Statistics Bulletin
Figure I-2 Production indices of major cereal (average 1987/89

100)

t/ha

Source: Agricultural Statistics Bulletin
Note: The sorghum yield of 2001 of 0.05t/ha is considered to be an abnormal figure, but is left as shown in the source.
Figure I-3 Yield of major cereal

 

C.

Policies for increasing production of maize
In order to understand the agricultural production, food and the diet pattern of Zambia, thissection explains the history of maize production and the policies for increasing its production1䋩. The
staple food made from maize flour is called “Nshima” in Zambia. Its evolution cannot be explained
without such background as the copper industry and development of cities during the colonial period,
then the settlement farms of whites, and the dual structure of agriculture.
(i) Changes in varieties and production techniques
Maize is the staple food crop for a number of people in the Eastern and Southern Africancountries (from Kenya in the north to South Africa in the south), and in Zambia it is no exaggeration to
say that the government had made strenuous efforts for disseminating maize, increasing its production
and improving the level of production techniques until the end of 1980s. In the beginning of the 1920s,
as the demand for maize as the food of mining workers increased, the white dent type, high yielding
and naturally crossbred varieties, imported from South Africa and America was widely planted,
consequently the traditional varieties of flint type decreased. Maize production of Zambia had
increased four times from the early 1960s to the end of 1980s. The increase is attributed to such factors
as: (a) abundant land resources; (b) variety improvement suitable for the production of smallholder
farmers; (c) input prices favorable to farmers; and (d) development of distribution system of input
materials and products. At the end of 1980s, the government spent 19% of its fiscal expenses forincreasing the maize production. In the 1990s, the Chiluba government on a full-scale basis
implemented the structural adjustment policies, then due to the liberalization of distribution channels
and reduction of fiscal expense so far borne by the government, the planting area and production ofmaize had considerably decreased.
Maize was reportedly introduced into the Southern Africa by the Portuguese merchants in the 16th
century. At that time, maize was the flint type in various colors, and the yield was low. Maize was also
planted in mixing with sorghum, millet, pumpkin and groundnut. In Zambia, while the flint type maize
had turned into one of staple food crops by the late 18th century, it became more important as the staple
food crop after the European settlers arrived at the beginning of 20th century. Today maize accounts for
70 % of both the cereal planting acreage and the total calorie intake of the country.
Maize became the essential wage goods supporting the life of mining workers early in the 1920s.
The colonial government established the Mazabuka Experimental Garden in 1913, carried out planting
tests of maize varieties imported from America, South Africa and Zimbabwe. At the settlement farmsof whites along railways located in the favorable situation, high yielding varieties of white flint type
like Hickory King were at first planted. Gradually these varieties disseminated among Africans and in
the 1920s it replaced the traditional varieties of flint type.

㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㪈㧕
Reference to the foregoing section: Howard, J. and C. Mungoma, Zambia’s Stop-and-Go Maize Revolution,
45-61, in Byerlee D. and C. Eicher, Africa’s Emerging Maize Revolution, Rienner, 1997
㩷

 

Table I-6㩷 Technology and policies of maize
1500-1700
Technology Flinty, variable
color OPVs
introduced by
Portuguese
traders.

1900

1920

1930

Arrival of
Europeancolonizers.

Copperindustrydevelops.

Railways line
built
connecting
Zimbabwe with
Zambiancopper belt.

Maize
Becomesanimportant
wage
good.

Maize Control
Act restricts
grain
movement,
establishesmonopoly statebuying stations
in commercial
areas,
establishes dual
pricing structure
for Europeanand Africanmaize.

Maize
becomes
important in
Africanfarmingsystems.
Policy/Organizational Environment

1910
Testing ofimported
white dent
OPVs at
Mazabuka
Experimental
Gardens.

British South
Africa (BSA)
secures prime
agriculturalland for
European

1940

1950
1960
1970
1980
1990
Federation SR52 rapidly First Zambian
Donorsestablished; adopted byhybrid released. increasemanylarge farmers,
support toagricultural yield doubles. First Zambian
maize program.
researchjoins maize
activities
Federation
program.
10 hybrids andtransferred dissolved,
2 improvedto1963.
Breeder
OPV varieties
Zimbabwe.
discontinuity
released byZambialeads to SR52
Research
receives
contamination. Branch, 1984SR52 parent
1992.
lines.
Most
Independenc Price subsidies Lima Program Great drought,
commercial e, 1964.
on fertilizer.
trains farmers 1991-1992.
maize
in hybrid seed,
processed Zambia Seed Outlets for credit, fertilizer use.
Marketinginto refined Producers
seed, fertilizer,
processing fullymaize meal Association maize marketing Fertilizer use
liberalized.
by large(ZSPA)
expanded.
quadruples,
scale mills produces
1960s-1980s. Input
because of hybrid maize Zamseed
distribution
controls on seed, 1968. established,Maizepartially
sales,
1978.
subsidies total liberalized,
milling.
19% ofmultinational
Zambianseed company
budget.
enterprise.
Fertilizer price Maize area,
subsidies end. seed, fertilizer㩷 Source: Byerlee D. and C. Eicher, Africa's Emerging Maize Revolution, Rienner, 1997, p.47.

When the Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland1䋩 was established in 1954, most of agriculturalresearch activities moved to Zimbabwe. The hybrid research in Zimbabwe started in 1932 and the firsthybrid variety SR1 was released in 1949. This variety led to the development of SR52 in 1960. Seedsof this late maturity and high yielding variety of dent type gave a great profit to the large-scalecommercial farms in Zambia, consequently the yield reportedly doubled. However since this variety
required a longer growing period and an earlier sowing, it was not suitable for arid area with a shortrain season and smallholder farmers2䋩.
Since the independence in 1964, while Zambia actively tackled with the maize research, theresearch much depended on the short-term expatriate researchers, and further there was an argument
among experts whether the emphasis should be placed on yield increase or quality improvement,
which resulted in a lack of continuity regarding the research strategy.
In the latter half of the 1970s, many donor governments and international organizations one after
the other assisted the maize development programmes of Zambia. At that time, while smallholder
famers had already introduced SR52, there was a controversy whether hybrid varieties are suitable forsmallholder farmers as they were not assured to obtain seeds and fertilizer. For this reason, theresearch of maize variety improvement was divided into two lines, i.e., the naturally bred varieties andthe hybrid varieties. The research development of hybrid varieties was led by the Swedish
International Development Agency (SIDA, the current Sida), and its achievement was MM752 in 1984.
㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㪈㧕The Federation was established in giving a priority to the interests of colonial governments of three nationsSouthern Rhodesia (Zimbabwe), Northern Rhodesia (Zambia) and Nyasaland (Malawi)-, the white settlers, andtheir home country- the UK. However due to discrepancies among their interests and the rise of independence
movement in Africa, the Federation was dissolved in 1963.
㪉㧕

The releases in 1984 included seven hybrid varieties: MM501, 502, 504, 601, 603 and 604, and two naturally
bred varieties: MMV612 and 441. Afterward, the hybrid ones: MM612 (1988). MM441 and MM62 (both in1992) were released.

㩷

 

Afterward, nine hybrid varieties and two naturally bred varieties, all being the dent type, weresuccessively developed and released1䋩.
The yields of these hybrid varieties were 60 % higher than traditional varieties, and 20 % thanSR52. Their characteristics were: (a) disease resistance and early planting; (b) high yielding; (c) stableyield of the third generation seeds by means of double or triple breeding; and (d) in spite that the yieldis high even in seed multiplication, the production cost is low. The potential yield was as high as 5-8
tons per hectare. The planting acreage of smallholder farmers out of the total maize planting acreage
had increased from 30 % in the mid-1980s to 60 % in the early 1990s. Further, from the latter half of1970s to the former half of 1980s, maize production increased 137 %, the proportion produced bysmallholder farmers from 60 % to 80 %.
(ii) Political background of expansion policy of maize
Development of variety improvement and planting techniques of maize in Zambia was strongly
supported by the pricing and distribution policies. In the early 1920s, with a rapid expansion of copper
mines, maize became the important wage goods of urban workers. In order to maintain low wages,
cheap food was required.
Since the independence, the Kaunda government and its government party UNIP (The United
National Independence Party), in an attempt to expand its supporting base among urban residents andremote farmers, who did not receive benefits of economic development during the colonial era,
actively promoted the development policies of maize. For making the African farmers to participate incommercial agriculture and to increase the income in rural area, it needed to weaken the dependence
on the large-scale agriculture managed by Europeans. Moreover by means of the market participationof remote farmers under unfavorable agricultural conditions who had been left behind from theeconomic development during the colonial era, the regional gap should be alleviated or resolved. It is
for this reason why maize is called economically as “wage goods” and politically as “political goods”.
During the 1930s, the colonial government started the price control and subsidy scheme forsecuring the command of distribution. In order to stably provide food to the mining cities, the colonial
government protected large-scale farms of whites, which accounted for most of the circulating amountof maize. After the independence, the government controlled the maize distribution as well as carriedout the subsidy scheme, at first through the National Agricultural Marketing Board (Namboard), andthen through the Zambia Cooperative Federation and its members. The unified prices wererespectively applied for the producer and consumer prices of maize and for the input prices like seeds
and fertilizer all over the country in every fiscal year. As a consequence, by the early 1990s about
60 % of maize production was circulated through the public institutions.
As a result of these policies and caused by the overly appreciated local currency, the domestic
price of maize was lower than the frontier price, therefore the production of large-scale farms locatedat convenient places accessible to market along railways became disadvantaged. On the other hand, in㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㪈㧕
Prior to the rainy season the soil is hard and difficult to cultivate by hand hoes. Moreover in case of earlysowing, it needs to weed twice, which causes the problem of securing labor force. Moreover since the priority isplaced on the planting of subsistence crops, the maize planting for commercial purpose tends to delay.
㩷

 

remote rural areas maize production increased. In Northern Province widely known as the practicing
area of the Citemene farming method, a kind of shifting cultivation, an expansion of maize production
using chemical fertilizer was realized1䋩.
Such policies for increasing maize production, in a sense, can be said to result in a decline of thefood security as a whole. Precisely, it is meant the stagnation of maize circulation in local markets,
reduction of agricultural production other than maize, and reduced storage at farm level take place. In
fact, if the price and procurement are assured, it is a reasonable economic behavior that producers tend
to increase the marketing amount of maize, while consumers tend to increase to purchase the cheapermaize flour with subsidies, and at the same time the incentive for storing reduces. The maize
production being vulnerable to droughts expanded, while the production of such drought resisting
crops as sorghum and millet reduced.
In the early 1980s, with the capital assistance of SIDA, Zamseed, a semi-state seed company wasestablished. As explained earlier, as SIDA launched the development of hybrid maize seeds, inestablishing the company, the system from research development to seed production/sales was built.
The sales amount of maize seeds had rapidly increased from 2,000 tons in 1970 to 15,000 tons in
1989.
As the financing scheme of the government through the depots of cooperatives had expanded, useof chemical fertilizer had increased even among smallholder farmers. By the early 1990s, about
one-fourth of small- and medium-scale farmers obtained credits every year. During the period between
the 1970s and the early 1980s, the prices of chemical fertilizer were approximately 30 % - 60 % of theimported prices due to the direct subsidies. As a result, the amount of fertilizer use expanded by fourtimes from the 1960s to the end of 1980s, and the amount of use in remote area out of the total
national use increased from 15 % to 39 %. At the end of 1980s, the amount of fertilizer applied tomaize ranked at second place among African countries. Sixty-four percent of smallholder farmers soldmaize, and 47 % received the visits of extension workers. Eighty-two percent of farmers cultivating
hybrid varieties obtained fertilizer at the nearby depots, 86% sold maize, and 80% purchased seeds.
As such, the maize production expansion measures of the government made great achievements.
It can be said to be a “green revolution” induced by policy measures. Thanks for a series of maize
expansion measures, the production expanded from large-scale to smallholder farmers, and from thearea along railways to the remote area, thus a certain result to alleviate the sectional and regional gaps
was realized. However by the mid-1980s, the increasing policies became unable to continue for fiscal
reasons. Then, as explained earlier, in the 1990s Zambia entered into a period of reform.
D.

Situation of agricultural production(i)Food crops(a) Maize
As stated, maize is one of the most widely grown crops in Zambia. At the end of 1980s, theplanting acreage reached at 1,020 thousand hectares and the output at 1,800 thousand tons. In the㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㪈㧕
Ohyama, S., 1998, Where Loans Vanish – Maize Cultivation in the Northern Part of Zambia, The Africa Report,
26: 38-41.
㩷

 

        

In 1991, against the agricultural exports amounting to USD 30 million, the imports of agriculture
related goods (agricultural products and equipment/materials) amounted to USD 62 million. As aresult of liberalization, foreign investment increased, and for the period of 1990-94 agricultural
exports doubled to about USD 50 million. As shown in Table I-7, the exports reached USD 146
million in 1997 caused by increase in agricultural exports and the diversification.
Table I-7 㩷 Export Value of agricultural products (USD million)
Sugar
Vegetables
Cutting flowers
CottonCoffeeTobaccoLivestock products
Paprika
Others
Total

1995
24.7
2.4
6.8
7.0
3.8
5.1
1.4
0.2
8.7
60.1

1996
30.8
5.3
9.1
9.0
4.8
9.1
1.7
0.7
18.0
88.5

1997
26.4
8.1
10.6
49.1
8.1
15.0
3.4
2.4
23.3
146.4

1998
33.2
10.5
16.4
26.4
8.9
17.7
5.0
5.0
18.7
138.3

1999
23.1
12.6
21.3
39.7
5.1
13.2
4.6
2.8
13.9
136.3

2000
22.8
12.0
16.9
11.2
8.6
8.5
6.3
1.8
19.5
107.6

2001
37.0
21.5
17.0
29.6
9.0
10.6
6.5
3.6
14.9
149.7

2002
44.9
30.3
35.1
9.2
21.7
4.9
146.1

䋭: data not available
Source: Agricultural Statistics BulletinThis increase of exports was much owed to cotton, vegetables, cutting flowers, coffee andtobacco. Since 1997 however the exports tended to slow down caused by sluggish international prices
and unfavorable weather.
Since the mid-1990s, as one of the movements for alleviating the dual structure of agriculture, theoutgrower scheme attracted an attention, which is undertaken through the collaboration between
smallholder farmers and commercial farms/agricultural enterprises. The scheme is a system thatcommercial farms or agricultural enterprises provide by contract techniques and input goods tosmallholder farmers and in return purchase the products from smallholder farmers. The contract
farming, except cotton and honey (collected in the woodland area), has been rapidly expanding in thearea nearby railways with convenient access (Table I-8).
Table I-8 Out-grower scheme (2003/04 estimates)
Crops
Cotton
Paprika
Soybean & oilseeds
Vegetables for exports
Tobacco leaf
CoffeeTotal planting
acreage(ha)150-170,000
2,700
30,0003,000
12,0005,000

Out-grower
acreage(ha)150-170,000
2,500
4,000
150
1,500
200

Government support program
No. of out-grower
farms
Number of
acreageparticipating farms
(ha)
(No)
170,000
4,200
5,200
4,000
2,800
1,700
3,500
300
60
110
1,000
870
1,150
400
120
130

Source: FAO 2004 p.12.

There are several types of the outgrower scheme. In the “nucleus estate type”, commercial farms
and/or agricultural enterprises provide production techniques and input goods to smallholder farmers,
while the smallholder farmers are sometimes hired as the workers of nucleus estates. The

㩷

 

“agri-business operator type” is one in which individual farmers are organized and their products arepurchased for processing and exports. In the “settlement type1䋩” is one that all settled farmers in aparticular area participate in a contract farming project in terms of farmers groups or cooperatives. In
the “organized producers” of this system, other individual farmers and farmers groups may be
included. Crops handled with by these contract farming organizations have been increasing, spreadingover castor bean, coffee, cotton, flowers, fresh vegetables, groundnut, honey, maize, milk, paprika,
tobacco leaf, sugarcane and sunflower.
(a) Cotton
In the Zambian agriculture, cotton takes an important position among industrial crops, and its
production has expanded mainly by smallholder farmers with less than 5 hectares. Cotton is planted inSouthern Province, Central Province and Eastern Province, the main producing area being Eastern
Province. The yield of cotton planted by smallholder farmers varies among them. While yields ofmany farmers are below 800 kg per hectare, a considerable number of farmers achieve those over
1,200 kg per hectare. As cotton is manually harvested, its quality has a high reputation.
(b) Tobacco
Tobacco is a traditional export crop of Zambia, but after the 1980s due to the government
intervention, the output declined. Then, due to economic liberalization, an increasing trend has been
observed. Geographically divided by the Luangwa River, in its eastern part like Easter Province, theBarley variety of tobacco, while in the western part such as Southern Province and Central Province,
the Virginia variety are planted. The Virginia variety is mostly produced in large-scale farms.
Smallholder farmers and emerging farms mainly plant the Burley variety, while the Virginia variety
account for only 10% of the total tobacco planting area.
(c) Sugarcane
The planting acreage of sugarcane has been in an increasing trend (Table I-9). The Nakambala
Zambia Sugar Company in Southern Province is planting sugarcane on a large scale basis using
irrigation. Moreover the nearby commercial farms and smallholder farms also plant sugarcane to sell itto the Company. The Company plans to expand the sugar output from 260,000 tons in 2007 to 440,000
tons in 2010, and is also expected to produce ethanol.
Table I-9㩷 Production of sugarcane
1990
1995
2000

Planting acreage 䋨ha䋩
11,596
12,664
15,047

Sugarcane output 䋨1,000t䋩 Sugar output 䋨1,000t䋩
1,136
253
1,307
145
1,472
188

Source: Agricultural Statistics Bulletin㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㪈㧕
㩷The “settlement type” is originated from the settlement on state owned land, and then most of the land has
been redistributed to smallholder farmers.
㩷

 

(d) Coffee
Coffee in Zambia has been rapidly growing in recent years (Figure I-19). Both produced andexporting amounts exceed 6,000 tons. Coffee in Zambia is all the Arabica variety of high quality. The
coffee sector of Zambia is under the control of the Coffee Board of Zambia (CBZ). The Zambia
Coffee Growers Association (ZCGA), the private organization of coffee growers, is the sole certified
organization of coffee marketing, and controls the quality and exporting amount. Most of coffee isproduced in 70 commercial farms in Northern Province, Luapula Province, Central Province, Lusaka
Province and Copperbelt Province, using irrigation facilities. CBZ together with ZCGA plan toincrease the production area to 10,000 hectares and the output to 20,000 tons by 2010. At the time of
2004, smallholder farmers accounted for only 1 % of total production, most of them depended on
rainfed water, but some in Northern Province and Copperbelt Province complementarily usedirrigation.
In the coffee sector, the contract growing system subject to smallholder farmers has alreadydeveloped. The suitable area for coffee production is regarded as Kasama, Mbala and Isoka Districts inNorthern Province, Kawambwa and Mwense Districts in Luapula Province, Mpongwe District inCopperbelt Province, and Kabwe District in Central Province.

ϴ͕ϬϬϬ
ϳ͕ϬϬϬ
ϲ͕ϬϬϬ
ƉƌŽĚƵĐƚŝŽŶ㧔㨠㧕ϱ͕ϬϬϬ

ĞǆƉŽƌƚ㧔㨠㧕ϰ͕ϬϬϬ
Ăǀ͘WƌŝĐĞƐ;h^Ψͬ㨠Ϳϯ͕ϬϬϬ
Ϯ͕ϬϬϬ
ϭ͕ϬϬϬ
Ϭ

Source: Agricultural Statistics Bulletin
Figure I-19㩷 Coffee production(e) TeaAt the end of 1980s, tea leaf production increased up to 3,600 tons, afterward reduced to some
600 tons. However after then it recovered and recorded a remarkable increase (Figure I-20).

㩷

 

ϱ͕ϬϬϬ;ƚͿƚĞĂϰ͕ϱϬϬ

ƚĞĂůĞĂĨ

ϰ͕ϬϬϬ
ϯ͕ϱϬϬ
ϯ͕ϬϬϬ
Ϯ͕ϱϬϬ
Ϯ͕ϬϬϬ
ϭ͕ϱϬϬ
ϭ͕ϬϬϬ
ϱϬϬ
Ϭ
ϭϵϴϲ

ϭϵϵϭ

ϭϵϵϲ

ϮϬϬϭ

Source: Agricultural Statistics Bulletin
Figure I-19㩷 Coffee production(f) Vegetables
Exports of such items as paprika, garden peas, snap peas, baby corn and cut flowers (mainlyroses) to the European markets have been rapidly expanding. The Agriflora, a commercial large-scale
farm, started production in the mid-1990s, but bankrupted in 2006. The company owned about 1,000
hectares of land close to the Lusaka International Airport, and produced about 5,000 tons of fresh
vegetables for exports. Moreover, the farm made contract with the smallholder farms within 50 km
radius of the processing factory, and exported fresh vegetables by air cargos.
Processed products of paprika are manufactured by the ZAHVAC/Bimzi Company (mainly
engaging in extraction of essential oils) and the Cheetah Zambia Ltd. (production of flakes andpowders). The paprika output amounted to 1,500 tons in 1998 and 2,000 tons in 2002, though it isexpected to fill the gap caused by the reduction in Zimbabwe (from 12,000 tons in 1999 down to 3,000
tons in 2004) and South Africa (by outbreaks of disease), due to the shortage of investment, it could
not develop as fast as expected. As shown in Table I-8, out of 2,700 hectares of the planting acreage in
2003/04 (estimate), 200 hectares was planted by commercial farms and the remaining was grown by
2,800 smallholder farmers on a contract basis. Their average planting acreage is 0.5-1 hectare and theyield per hectare 400-600 kg on rainfed field, and in case of using irrigation facilities as high as 3,000
kg. The yield per hectare in large-scale farms is 3,000-4,000 kg.

(5)Agricultural productivity and income level of farmers
It is important to consider the regional feature of agriculture in examining the agricultural

production and income levels of farmers in Zambia. Since the detail is explained in Chapter IV:
Farming Types, in this section the main features of agriculture in each province is roughly explained inreferring to Table I-10. It should be considered that affected by the climatic and other conditions, notonly planting acreage but also cultivated crops vary one year after another.

㩷

 

Table I-10㩷 Ratios of farms cultivating crops by province (%,Maize
Sorghum
MilletRice
Cassava
Sweet potato
PotatoGroundnuts
Beans
CowpeaWheat
Cottn
Tobacco (Barley)
Tobacco(Virginia
Sunflower
Soybean
Paprika
Sugarcane
Cashewnut
Vegetables
OthersCentral
94.6
22.4
23.0
1.8
33.5
73.2
7.1
66.9
31.6
17.2
0.4
13.4
1.1
0.9
12.5
5.5
4.1
11.0
2.8
50.3
16.7

Copperbelt
90.3
17.9
9.2
1.2
31.4
57.1
5.4
73.9
36.8
7.6
0.4
0.4
0.7
0.4
1.7
4.8
2.9
12.1
5.6
50.4
13.8

Eastern
98.3
7.9
12.4
8.0
24.9
53.3
6.4
67.9
24.2
28.5
0.3
25.9
6.1
1.3
15.1
8.0
1.4
14.5
1.2
32.5
9.3

Luapula
59.1
7.9
19.1
5.1
93.9
68.3
2.1
73.8
36.9
9.1
0.3
0.4
3.5
2.0
1.7
3.7
2.0
5.1
5.2
33.8
18.5

Lusaka
86.7
6.2
2.2
0.5
15.4
47.8
4.4
46.9
25.7
10.1
0.3
2.5
0.4
0.3
3.5
2.0
2.3
10.4
2.4
55.5
15.0

2000)

Northern North-Western Southern
64.7
90.2
95.5
35.9
23.3
19.1
63.1
18.2
12.4
7.8
2.5
0.1
87.8
78.0
9.1
73.6
72.0
59.7
8.8
16.2
5.8
71.2
40.4
64.7
63.4
46.0
24.4
21.0
8.0
11.4
0.6
0.3
0.3
0.4
0.3
6.8
3.6
3.1
0.7
2.1
1.6
0.6
9.2
5.7
11.9
7.2
4.2
2.0
2.8
2.6
3.0
10.4
7.7
9.2
4.4
1.1
1.6
33.8
28.8
50.5
19.2
18.6
14.9

Western Whole country
91.5
85.1
36.6
20.4
51.5
26.1
22.5
6.0
61.2
49.6
34.9
60.8
1.0
6.3
35.1
63.1
25.6
36.2
10.3
15.5
0.3
0.4
0.7
7.1
4.2
3.0
2.4
1.4
0.8
7.8
0.6
4.9
2.0
2.5
5.7
10.0
2.1
3.0
18.7
38.2
12.5
15.1

Source: CSO, 2000 Census of Population and Housing
Note: Ratios of number of planting farms out of total number of farms

While maize is grown all over the country as the staple food crop, the ratios of cultivating farms
are lower in Luapula Province (59.1 %) and Northern Province (64.7 %) than the average of wholecountry (85.1 %). In Northern Province the ratio of millet cultivating farms (63. 1%) is high. In
Luapula Province cassava is widely grown (93.9 %). Similarly the ratios of cassava growing farms in
Northern Province (87.8%), North-Western Province (78 %) and Western Province (61.2 %) are higher
than the national average. Ratio of rice growing farms is only 6.0 % but it is at the highest (22.5 %) in
Western Province.
Following maize, the high ratios of planting farms are observed in sweet potato (60.8 %) andgroundnut (63.1 %). Against the national average ratio of farms planting beans was 36.2 %, those of
Northern Province (63.4 %) and North-Western Province (46.0 %) are higher. Regarding vegetables,
the national average ratio is 38.2 % and those of Lusaka Province, Central Province, Copperbelt
Province and Southern Province are higher. Yet those of Western Province (18.7 %) andNorth-Western Province (28.8 %) are considerably lower.
Yields of main cereal crops, as stated earlier, are generally low. Here the maize yield is explained
in detail. Table I-11 shows the analyzed result of maize yield for 21 years (1987-2007). The average
yield per hectare for 21 years in the whole country was 1.6 tons. Those provinces above the national
average include Central, Copperbelt, Luapula, Lusaka and Northern Provinces. On the contrary, that
below the national average is Western Province. The highest yield on the provincial basis in the period
was recorded in Lusaka Province around 1990, excluding in 2003. Yield variation (the highest divided
by the lowest) was generally as high as 3.45, in particular high in Southern Province (18.8) andEastern Province (8.22) and Western Province (5.76). Although the periods do not fully correspondwith each other, compared with the yield during the period of the maize biased policies, the yield had
declined for 11 years in the latter half of analyzed period. An exception is Lusaka Province, wheremaize yield increased by 1.23 times.

㩷

 

Table I-11㩷 Yield of maize by province (kg/ha, 1987-2007)
Average yield
ave. whole country䋽1.00
Yield
Maximum
Year
Yield
MinimunYearmaximun/minimun(a) 1987-96
yield(b) 1997-07
yield
䇭(b)/(a)Central
2,297
1.43
3,514
1993
1,344
1999
2.62
2,509
2,105
0.84

Copperbelt
2,149
1.34
3,503
1990
1,090
1998
3.21
2,439
1,885
0.77

Eastern
1,368
0.85
2,638
1993
321
1992
8.22
1,520
1,229
0.81

Luapula
1,870
1.16
2,834
1994
712
1998
3.98
2,282
1,496
0.66

Lusaka
1,848
1.15
3,521
2003
799
1987
4.40
1,646
2,032
1.23

Northern North-Western Southen
1,817
1,510
1,457
1.13
0.94
0.91
2,963
2,202
3,584
1988
1991
1988
792
1,039
191
1989
2001
1992
3.74
2.12
18.80
2,193
1,745
1,627
1,476
1,297
1,302
0.67
0.74
0.80

Western While country
837
1,606
0.52
1.00
1,917
2,523
1988
1993
333
731
1992
1992
5.76
3.45
1,010
1,768
680
1,459
0.67
0.83

Source: Agricultural Statistics Bulletin

Table I-12 shows the data on the basis of the Post Harvest Survey1䋩 carried out for the wholecountry and supplemented by two additional surveys. According to the national average, thoughvarying year by year, the income from agricultural and livestock products accounted for 70-80 % of
the total income and the remaining 20-30 % came from non-agricultural income. Out of the income
from agricultural products, 30-40 % originated from cereals.
Table I-12㩷 Income composition of small- and medium-scale farms (%)
Agricultural products
CerealRoot crops
Beans
Non-edible crops
vegetables/fruits
Other crops
Livestock products
Non-agri. activities

2000/01
69.1
38.3
14.2
8.3
2.4
5.9 1
䋭2
2.8
27.7

2003/04
72.5
35.1
17.7
9.6
5.5
4.6 1
0.1
5.1
21.7

Source: Zulu, B., T.S.and others, 2007. p.5.
Notes: 1) Crops are shown in gross output value including production costs.
Horticultural crops (vegetables and fruits) include only sales value.
2) For convenience, determined as two times of horticultural crops.
3) Data of 2000/01 do not include velvet beans, paprika, pop corn, sugarcane,sugarbean, greengum and guineapea.
4) The totals do not add up to 100%, but are quoted as in the source.

Table I-13 shows the gross agricultural income by agro-ecological region. The “lowest rainfall
region” corresponds to the Agro-Ecological Region I, where the ratios of cereal and livestock productsin the gross agricultural income are high. Root and tuber crops are not highly important. The average
income per farm of the region in the 2003/04 marketing year exceeded the national average. The “lowrainfall region” coincides with the Agro-Ecological Region II, where the ratio of non-food commercial
crops is high. The “high rainfall region” includes the Agro-Ecological Regions II and III, where theratio of cereal is high. The “highest rainfall region” coincides with the Agro-Ecological Region III,
corresponding with the area of northern part of Zambia. In this region, the ratios of fruits, vegetables㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㪈㧕The survey is conducted every year by Central Statistics Office, with the subject to about 8,000 farms,
including smallholder farms (0.1-5 hectares) and medium-scale farms (5-20 hectares). Ballard Zulu and others(2007) carried out supplementary surveys for the reason that the Post Harvest Survey does not include suchgrowing sectors as fruits, vegetables and livestock products as its subjects.
㩷

 

and cereals are high.
Throughout all regions, the gross agricultural income in the 2003/04 marketing year increased
from that in 2000/01. Adequate rainfall in 2003/04 was attributed to the increase. The lowest growing
rate took place in the “high rainfall region” might be caused by the high proportion of cereal there.
While an analysis for longer period is required, the high increase rate in income observed in thelowest rainfall region and the low rainfall region, the so-called dry area, is assumed to be caused by
the dissemination of high value crop planting such as cotton, tobacco, fruits and vegetables. In otherregions with higher rainfall, due to a delay of development of commercial agriculture, the income
remains lower than the national average.
Table I-13㩷 Gross agricultural income by agro-ecological division
Agro-ecologicaldivision

Marketingyear䇭note

Lowest rainfall area
Division I
Low rainfall area
Division II
High rainfall area
Divisions II, III
Highest rainfall area
Division III

2000/01
2003/04
2000/01
2003/04
2000/01
2003/04
2000/01
2003/04
2000/01
2003/04

Whole country䋱䋩

Ratios in gross agricultural income (䋦)No. ofFruitsLivestoc
non-edible
farms
Other
BananaCerealRoot cropskvegetablecommerci(weighted䋩
crops
oil seedss
al crops
products
231,858
34.3
1.8
4.1
9.2
21.8
28.8
264,460
21.4
0.4
2.5
12.3
22.8
14.1
26.5
297,220
22.3
1.2
8
33.6
25.6
9.4
331,148
16.1
1.3
6.5
52.8
0.2
9.4
13.8
147,628
45.3
7.5
8.7
5.4
17.2
15.9
165,697
40.1
9.2
11.1
12.6
0.3
10.3
16.4
450,217
27.7
10.2
15.8
0.3
36.6
9.2
505,839
27.3
10.1
12.9
0.2
0.2
36.2
13.1
1,126,921
34.3
1.8
4.1
9.2
21.8
28.8
1,267,145
21.4
0.4
2.5
12.3
22.8
14.1
26.5

Gross agri. income (USD䋩
Total
100.0
100.0
100.1 2䋩100.1 2䋩
100.0
100.0
99.8 2䋩
100.0
100.0
100.0

unit䋺1000

per fram

19,841
57,55933,694
61,9098,258
13,03330,97855,67926,427
52,123

86
218
113
187
56
79
69
110
82
149

Source: Zulu, B., T.S.and others, 2007. p.12.
Notes: 1) "Marketing year" covers from April to March of the following year.
2) In the source, indicated as 100.

2.

Prospect of Agricultural Development(1)

Food crops
Under the Kaunda government, specifically from the latter half of 1970s to the 1980s, the maize

production expansion policies brought a fiscal burden to the government, which was thus put to an end
with the implementation of structural adjustment policies by the following Chiluba government. From
the aspect of present day, the maize biased policies may be regarded to be highly extraordinary. Yet as
stated earlier, it had to be implemented against the complicated domestic political background.
Moreover the food crisis worldwide at that time might be considered as the background. Furthermore
the abundant food, though limited to maize, provided the basis of a political stability of Zambia, amultiracial state, and for nurturing its calm national character.
For a country with rural or agricultural population accounting for 60-70 % of the total population,
the fact that the maize related budget accounted for 20 % of the national budget cannot be said to behighly excessive. Maize as the wage goods was required to be in low price especially from the miningside through its efficient production from both the state and private sectors. As consumers, similar to
Japanese people who are keen to obtain white rice meals, the people of Zambia have a desire to get thebright white “shima” as the staple food, and even now they mentally would have it.
Certainly the policies excessively biased to maize brought various adverse effects. Particularly

㩷

 

the planting techniques dependent on chemical fertilizer resulted in a waste of precious resources. In
the area with insufficient infrastructure of farmland, the effect of fertilizer application was insecure.
When rains wash away expensive fertilizer, its effect is lost. As the maize with potentially high yield
varieties disseminated and consequently the traditional crops decreased, particularly in the area withlow rainfall, food insecurity rose, and the agriculture became vulnerable to the direct effects ofweather vagaries. Moreover the dependent character of farmers on the government strengthened, at thesame time the sense of self-reliance for securing food by their own initiative and for achieving theincreased production weakened.
Yet since the reform, agricultural diversification has progressed. The production of minor cereal
such as millet and sorghum, cassava and sweet potato increased, and as a result the production in therespective suitable areas has been making the progress as hoped for. In the area with abundant water
resources, the agricultural production during dry season will become important. In Zambia, the dry
and wet seasons are distinctively divided, and the dry season with little rain expands for 4-5 months.
Without irrigation, crops hardly grow. Recently the pumps with foot pedals are extensively used. Evensome smallholder farmers use the pumps driven by engine. Such types of irrigation are at present
limited to the farming area close to urban cities and the farms mainly growing cash crops. The crop
planting during dry season is particularly important from the standpoints of income increase andsecuring food supplies. Needs for research development such as crop selection, variety improvementand development of planting methods should become higher. The roles played by public institutions
and NGOs in this aspect should also be more important.
Such an epoch-making agriculture is on one hand against a providence of nature, thus calls for a
caution. Although water resources are abundant, it is in general terms, thus when ground water
simultaneously pumped up, unforeseen events may take place. To the extent permissible of cost andreturn, utilization of river water and construction of dams would be needed in future. From the aspectof public infrastructure investment, road building is indispensable. Yet the investment plans taking the
local conditions and cost aspects into account are called for.
While the modern investment from outside is important, the utilization of native local resources
should also be considered. For example, the application of expensive and sometimes not easily
available chemical fertilizer is needed depending on the situation, since the utilization of manure isseen, its scientific analysis and applied research are also required.

(2)

Export crops
Recent diversification of exporting crops and increase in value of agricultural products are thebright elements for Zambia, which is trying to emerge from an economy biased to the exports ofmining resources led by copper. In undertaking poverty alleviation and in maintaining food security, agrowth of the export crop sector is indispensable. In directing toward a stable development ofagriculture and rural area, the promotion of food crops and export crops are closely connected eachother.
At present in this connection, three keywords, i.e., smallholder farms, commercial/large-scale
farms and contract farming, appear to be important. Dual structure of agriculture tends to create a
㩷

 

contradictory pattern, and, as in the neighboring country Zimbabwe, a state may fall into the criticalsituation. Though not fully analogous, the setting of Zambia resembles. The issue how whites andAfricans can manage the coexistence and cooperation in the farming sector is important even in future.
While the contract farming system is currently enhancing the growth of export crop production, it
will have many problems. Historically until a very recent time, a great number of farming carried out
by Africans has been a subsistence agriculture based on self-sufficiency. In such a type of farming,
production is not carried out for producing a surplus. It aims at achieving their own survival, andcoexisting with families and relatives. It did neither need to standardize the sizes of products nor tocontrol the quality. It did not use chemical fertilizer and pesticides.
The contract farming on the other hand is a type of farming dependent on purchased productive
and input goods from outside. In other words, without funds one cannot basically conduct production.
Even when a credit is obtained, unless profit is earned, the management runs into deficit. In rural area
where cash revenue is not common, it turns the farms being deeply entangled in debt. Unless one has amortgage, one cannot find a lender despite his wishes. His sole mortgage is land. Yet the land is not a
private asset, but under the customary land tenure system. To change it to a modern system is not
simple. Under the customary system, land is part of the integrated body concerning power, income,social status and incentives. For these reasons, the contract farming basically develops in the suburbsof cities at the beginning.
Zambia is basically pursuing the path toward the market economy. It proceeds in the frameworkof global economy, accordingly as far as this framework maintains, the relationship of mutual
dependence would strengthen. In the connection, the conventional socialist economy and further theless developed market economy need to be duly considered. They are of a fundamentally different
nature from the mechanism of market economy. While it is an urgent issue to build a system fittedwith the market economy, the system may conflict with the old system. Under the less developed
market economy, high transaction costs often take place. For the reason, it needs to establish a fare andimpartial third party institution, which strictly checks the implementation and supervision of contracts.
In considering the export agriculture in future, it is highly important to emphasize on
competitiveness, comparative advantage and economic efficiency. Zambia as a land locked country isunder unfavorable conditions in terms of transportation. The current rise of petrol prices is expected tocontinue for some time. Exports through long distance transportation especially air transportation are
doubtful in terms of the economic efficiency. Moreover considering the global environment becomesan indispensable aspect. Promotion of export industry only pursuing the price difference among
countries, in other words only the profit but not considering the global environment may beapproaching its end sooner or later. It suggests that an export industry considering intra-regional trades
and highly processed products is to be examined.

(3)

Direction of agricultural development
More than ten years has passed since Zambia started the liberalization and privatization of its

economy. Although the contents of liberalization were not fully comprehensive, at the same time it isquestioned that in the world where the globalization has been rapidly progressing, whether Zamia
㩷

 

should direct its agricultural development on the basis of principles of free trade. Although the country
concerned should judge this point by itself, there may be several issues to be considered.
The first issue is to strengthen the self-sufficient basis of the basic food. At present, outside
agriculture, there is no developed economic sector other than mining. While efforts for developing theindustrialization are required, its outcome cannot be realized in a short period. At present the prices ofnatural resources have been rising, and the future agriculture should be examined in assuming that thistrend will continue.
In a very simplified picture, if foreign exchange rates are determined by market mechanism, therise in resource prices would lead a hike of Zambian currency, the Zambian kwacha. As a result, some
symptoms of the Dutch Disease may appear. In other word, food could be imported in lower prices.
The typical case is seen in Nigeria after the oil crisis in 1970s. As imports of agricultural products
increased, the domestic agriculture declined. While the current world economic structure is not totallysame as in that time, it is feared that the dependence on imports of agricultural products would be
likely to rise.
One quite different element from that time is the bio-energy boom. Zambia aims at developing
the bio-energy industry in the Fifth Development Plan of 2007. Already the planting of Jatropha
started in 45,000 hectares in Chongwe District of Southern Province, 15,000 hectares in Kasama
District of Northern Province and other districts like Solweji District of North-Western Province, mostof them in the contract farming1䋩. The raw materials of bio-ethanol include sugarcane, sorghum andcassava, and the Nakambala Zambia Sugar Company is expanding the planting area of sugarcane forproviding the raw materials for bio-ethanol.
Most of literatures regarding the Zambian agriculture point out that land and labor force areabundant in Zambia. Land issues were already explained earlier, and in the area under the customaryland tenure system there is a risk of increasing outbreaks of land dispute in accompanying with thedevelopment of contract production farming.
In the labor market, as the wages of simple manual workers are extremely low, if the demand forlabor increases, the wage would rise in a short period. In other word, assuming the present daily wage
being around USD 1, which stands at a low absolute level compared with that in developed countries,
it would easily rise to USD 2-3 in a short period.
One of the serious problems in Zambia is a decrease in population caused by AIDS/HIV. Whilethe death rate by AIDS has been declining in urban area, it is still high in rural area. Decrease inagricultural labor force caused by AIDS adversely affects agricultural production. It is an urgent matterto assist the farms, which lost the labor force by AIDS or have the agricultural labor force infectedwith AIDS.
As discussed above, efforts for developing agriculture are essential to Zambia for undertaking toescape from the monoculture economy centering on the mining industry. Although it is still undervarious constraints, an efficient and fair policy approach to induce to develop its agriculture should be
examined.
㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㪈㧕
African Biodiversity Network, Agrofuels in Africa, 2007. p.13
㩷

 

3.

Present Situation and Issues of Forests and Forestry(1)Overall situation of forests
Zambia is one of the southern African countries having a large area of forests amounting to

45,610 thousand hectares, accounting for about 60% of the total land area (752,600 km2) of Zambia.
Within the forest area, the government on a priority basis carries out the forest conservation in theforest reserves and the national parks, each accounting for 9 % of the total land area of the country.
Forest vegetation of Zambia is largely classified to two groups. The first group is the closed
forests, mainly comprising of evergreen trees of the Cryptosepalum and deciduous trees of the
Baikiaea. The second group is the open forests sometimes called the savanna woodlands accounting
for 87.5 % of the total Zambian forests, including the Miombo Woodlands, the Kalahari Woodlands,
the Mopane Woodlands and the Munga Woodlands (Table I-14).
Table I-14㩷 Classification of forests
Classification
Closed forests
Open forests
㩷 Miombo
㩷 Kalahari㩷 Mopane㩷 Munga
Others㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷

% to total forest area
8.2
87.4
58.3
15.8
7.2
6.1
4.4

Source: Forest Certification in Zambia, Njovu 2004

Among these woodlands, the Miombo Woodlands account for about 60 % of the total forest area,
constituting the main part of Zambian forests. Its soil fertility however low, therefore the trees
belonging to the Legume family having root nodule bacteria are predominant. The main trees ofMiombo Woodlands are Brachystegia, Julbernadia, Isoberlinia, Marquesia and Uapaca. Besidetimbers, the collection of mushrooms and honey is observed. The Miombo Woodlands are not limited
to Zambia but cover the vast area of the southern Africa including Angola, Zimbabwe, Malawi,
Mozambique, Tanzania, and Democratic Republic of the Congo, thus the typical woodlands of theregion.
The purposes that the Zambian government manages forests are not only the forest conservationin specific area but also for providing timbers to various industries like the mining industry. Since theproductivity of native forests is so low that their timber supplies are limited on one hand, the demand
for timber increased from various industries including the mining sector on other hand, thegovernment started reforestation in the 1960s. Though it was held on a pilot basis at the beginning, thearea under industrial reforestation currently reaches over 55,000 hectares. Afforested trees are Pine
(79 %) and Eucalyptus (20 %). However new reforestation and its expansion are not enough,consequently the commercial reforested acreage is currently decreasing. It is pointed out thatreforestation has substantially reduced the pressure on the native forests in Copperbelt Province, themain copper producing area. Up to 1991, all reforested land was owned directly by the government or
through the Zambia Forestry and Forest Corporation (ZAFFICO), a semi-governmental organization.
But due to the liberalization policies of 1991, ZAFFICO sold its assets together with part of its
㩷

 

reforested land, and at present ZAFFICO as a private company owns 2000 hectares of reforested land.
To be noted, the forestry administration is charged by the Forestry Department of the Ministry of
Tourism, Environment and Natural Resources.

(2)

Ownership and holding of forests
The ownership of all lands and natural resources in Zambia belongs to the President representing

the people. Accordingly the Forest Act states that all trees “are owned” by the President on behalf of
the Zambian people. Concerning the management of natural resources however the authority istransferred to various state agencies, thus concerning forests the authority is delegated to the
traditional local heads or the Director of Forest Department. Forests are classified into the following
three groups according to the types of ownership or holdings:(i)

Forest reserves: Like the water catchment area of rivers, the forests that national values arerecognized, which are designated by the state or local governments. Harvesting is allowed
under license(ii)

Trust lands: They are used by local communities for their subsistence. Limited harvesting isallowed(iii)

National parks: They are managed for protecting wild life. No forestry activities likeharvesting of trees are allowed(3)Management and utilization of forest resources
Forestry industry contributes at least 3.7 % to GDP. Within the industry, the largest part is thewooden fuel, including commercial charcoal production of 2.2% and subsistent wood collection of
0.8 %. Then 90 % of the people are using the fuelwood thus produced. However the productivity offorestry industry is low throughout all stages from production, processing to distribution, furthermore
due to the underdevelopment of the infrastructure such as roads and communications, the transaction
costs become high. For the reason, the improvement of efficiency in forestry industry including
small-scale enterprises would bring great benefits to the economy and environment. On the other hand,as it is estimated that 900,000 hectares of forests are being lost every year, it is requested to reducesuch a high declining rate. One of the main causes of forest reduction is charcoal production, which is
widely used by poor households in urban area.
The consumption of charcoal in urban area is estimated to amount to 3.9 kg per day or 1,040 kg
per year per household. In 2000, the charcoal consumption in Lusaka is estimated to be 245,000 tons,
which is equivalent to 15 million m3 of timber. For the period of 2006-1010, the number of urbanhouseholds is estimated to increase by 100,000, thus a further increase of charcoal demand willcertainly take place. In strengthening the forestry management in cooperation with the producers andin improving the efficiency of charcoal production, thus strengthening their negotiating position in themarket would bring the direct economic benefits to the rural poor.
Reduction in forests becomes also a serious environmental issue. As the causes, apart fromcharcoal production, inadequate farming techniques, uncontrolled bush fires, uncontrolled forest
㩷

 

cutting for the construction uses, and overgrazing of animals are pointed out. Moreover the illegal
cutting and unlawful trading of timbers are the serious issues. Furthermore it is said that 250,000
hectares of forests are lost every year, caused by uncontrolled development of forestry products, illegal
settlements and transfers from forests to farmlands (Table I-15). Other factors resulting in forest
reduction include population increase, urbanization and industrialization.
Table I-15㩷 Trend of forest acreage
Forest acreage䋨1000 ha䋩
1995

2000

2005

49,124

44,67642,452

Annual changes
1990-2000
2000-2005
1000ha/year%
1000ha/year
%
-445
-0.9
-445
-1.0

Source: FAO, Global Forest Resources Assessment 2005

Most of the domestic timber demand comprises of fuelwood and charcoal, which constitute themajor energy sources of the country. In particular, production and marketing of charcoal is an
important source of income in rural area. The high demand for construction timbers follows. On theother hand, around the period of independence, Zambia imported timbers for meeting the uses of
construction industry, afterward, thanks for forestry development, Zambia at present turns a net
exporting country of timber and its products (Table I-16).
Table㸇-16㩷 Production, consumption and exports of timber and its products (2002)
Items
TimberWood
panel
Wood fuel
Wood scrap
Fiber/pulp
Recycled paper

Production
m3

Consumptionm3

157,000
17,900155,439
18,823

7,219,000
67,000007,219,013
67,03122
1,663

Imports
AmountValue
3m
US$ 000
251
71
923
281
13
31
22
1,663

1
2
12
38

ExportAmount
3
m
1,812
0

Value
US$ 000
452
0

0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0

Source䋺FAO web-page

In addition, as other important forestry products than timber, mushrooms, wildlife for meat,honey, honey wax, fruits, insects (caterpillars for food), plant fiber and medicinal plants.

(4)

Issues of forests and forestry
Issues of forests and forestry of Zambia would be considered from the two aspects ofenvironment and economy.
From the aspect of environment, as the factors to reduce and degrade forests, such three factors as
charcoal production, clearing agricultural land, and clearing for settlements and related development
are mentioned. For the purpose of forest protection, a guideline with more strict management andutilization should be introduced.
From the economic aspect, in spite of the rich forestry resources, their appropriate utilization is
not fully realized thus sufficient benefits are not obtained due mainly to rural poverty. Therefore it
needs to improve the utilization modality so as to maximize the benefits while maintaining the

㩷

 

sustainability of forest resources.
As the copper mining has been the largest economic activity in the country, in order to alleviate
rural poverty, the government is undertaking the policies promoting diversification of economic
activities especially in focusing on rural area. This means an increasing demand for farmland, andresults in a reduction of forests. From the aspect of individual income, efficiency of agriculture ishigher than forestry thus the rate of expansion faster, which resulted in advancement of the settlementin the Miombo woodlands. Yet as the soil fertility of the woodlands is low so is its agricultural
productivity, thus in fact it is difficult to obtain sufficient benefits and the poverty there would noteasily disappear.
In future, it is needed to raise the profitability by means of improved market of diverse forestry
products rather than the transfer to farmland, and to this effect it should pursue the maximization of
profits obtained from forestry resources while effectively protecting forests.

4.

Development Goals and Position of Agriculture and Forestry(1)

Economic development plans
After independence, almost all African countries, whether a socialist government or not,emphasized the roles of state in development and economic management, and formulated five- or
seven-year development plans. Zambia also successively formulated five-year plans, starting from theProvisional Development Plan (1964-66) immediately after the independence, the First (1966-71), theSecond (1972-76) and the Third Five-Year Plans (1980-84) were prepared.
However in the 1980s when the economic crisis and introduction of the structural adjustment
programmes led by the World Bank and IMF prevailed, the preparation of five-year plans became
difficult, thus instead of five-year development plans, the economic recovery programmes for theperiod of two to three years were formulated.
Launching of the Third Five-Year Development Plan, as the Zambian economy fell into a crisis
due to the declined copper prices and the oil crisis, delayed for three years. Moreover after the Third
Five-Year Development Programme, there was an interruption of five years until the Fourth Five-YearDevelopment Plan. During the period, in 1987 the Kaunda/UNIP government abolished the Structural
Adjustment Programme led by the World Bank/IMF, and formulated its own New Economic Recovery
Programme-the Interim National Development Plan 1987-1988, and afterward the Fourth Five-YearDevelopment Programme (1989-93). Yet as around 1989 the Kaunda/UNIP government actually
introduced the structural adjustment programme along the direction of IMF again, furthermore in 1991
when the newly elected Chiluba/MMD Government took over Kaunda/UNIP rule, the FourthFive-Year Development Plan was abandoned in the middle. Afterward for a long period no five-year
development plan was prepared.
By the mid-1990s, the aid coordination among donors, mainly Europeans and the US, madeprogress, as well as the sector-wide approach, which specified the sector policies and sector
investment plans. In Zambia, in the late 1990s, the following four Sector Investment Plans (SIPs) wereintroduced.
㩷

 

(i)

The Agricultural Sector Investment Programme (ASIP): the first phase 1996-99(ii) The Basic Education Sub-Sector Investment Programme (BESSIP): the first phase 1999-2002,
and the second phase 2002-2005(iii) The National Health Strategic Plan(iv) The Road Sector Investment Programme: 1998-2002
Since around 2000, in responding to the accumulated debt problem of poor countries, the Debt
Relief Initiative for Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPCs) started. As the poverty reduction
became the central development issue in the world, indebted poor countries in Africa were required to
produce the Poverty Reduction Strategic Papers (PRSPs) to become eligible for the HIPC debt relief㩷1䋩.
In May 1998, the government formulated the National Poverty Reduction Strategic Framework.
The framework listed the following five strategies for reducing poverty: (a) achievement of a broad
based economic development, with an emphasis on agriculture and rural development; (b) provision ofphysical infrastructure; (c) improvement of the productivity of small industries in urban area and theinformal sector; (d) development of human resources; and (e) coordination, monitoring and evaluationof projects and activities related to poverty alleviation.
In December 1998, ,based on the Strategic Framework, the National Poverty Reduction Action
Plan 1999-2004 was prepared as a five-year plan for implementing poverty reduction. The Action Planput up its goals as follows: (a) to reduce the incidence of poverty (ratio of population under povertyline) from 70 % to 50 %; (b) coordination of all poverty reduction programmes; and (c) to monitor andevaluate the effects of poverty reduction programmes. Moreover the Action Plan emphasized theefforts initiated by poor people themselves, and is expected to assist such efforts.
The World Bank/ IMF approved the Interim Poverty Reduction Strategic Paper (I-PRSP) at theend of 2000. Based on the I-PRSP, the 2002-2004 Poverty Reduction Strategic Paper (PRSP
2002-2004) was enacted in March 2002. The PRSP 2002-2004 set the “economic theme” and the“social theme” as the two pillars of poverty reduction. In the “economic theme”, the PRSP emphasized
the importance of economic growth stimulation for improving the livelihood and welfare of the poor.
It targeted agricultural development as the engine of income expansion for the poor. The PRSP
recognized that growth stimulation should be complemented by “social theme”. In particular, it
perceived basic education and basic health care were powerful instruments for assisting the poor, andallocated much resources to these sectors (PRSP 2002-2004: p.38).
The PRSP 2002-2004 estimated Zambia wouldneed to grow at an annual rate of 6 to 8 % toachieve the poverty reduction targets set for 2015, and it viewed the projected growth rates of
2002-2004 of around 4 % would be too modest. The PRSP 2002-2004 also considered the importanceof investment expansion for recovering the economic growth.
President Mwanawasa, immediately after his inauguration, tasked the Ministry of Finance andNational Planning to prepare a transitional national development plan. The President then ordered to㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㪈㧕
The Debt Relief Initiative for Heavily Indebted Poor Countries was launched in 1996, and the Enhanced Debt
Relief Initiative for Heavily Indebted Poor Countries in 2001 respectively.
㩷

 

produce five-year national development plan from 2006 onwards. Thus, the Second Poverty Reduction
Strategic Paper was formulated as the Fifth National Development Plan covering the period of
2006-2010. A formulation of the five-year plan was thus realized for the first time in 15 years after the
Fourth Five-Year Plan (1989-1993) was abandoned in the halfway. President Mwanawasa pointed out
for the reasons for introducing a five-year national development plan that it was needed even in aliberalized economy, to prioritize the public investment and to provide the basis of cooperation withdonors (FNDP).
The Fifth National Development Plan was formulated on the basis of the National Vision 2030.
The National Vision 2030 put the goal to make Zambia a prosperous middle income country by theyear 2030. The theme of the Fifth National Development Plan is “broad based wealth and job creation
through citizenry participation and technological advancement”, which is further divided into theeconomic and social sub-themes. The strategic focuses are placed on economic infrastructure andhuman resources development. The Fifth Plan also emphasizes agricultural development as theengines of economic growth as well as for providing the opportunities for improving livelihoods.
Measures for promoting economic growth are complemented by various approaches in the social
aspect. They include the distribution favorable to the poor, safety net, social protection and good
governance.
The Poverty Reduction Strategic Papers are supposed to be implemented with people’s
participation so that the stakeholders participate in the formulation and monitoring. Concerning PRSP
of Zambia this participatory process is reportedly carried out relatively well as seen in the active
engagement of civil soceity organizations.
The Civil Society for Poverty Reduction (CSPR) Zambia, a network organization of NGOs,
participated in PRSP. CSPR was organized in October 2000 as a network of civil society organizations.
It dispatches the representatives to the eight working groups of PRSP (Mpepo 2003). When CSPR
started, all of some 10 NGO members placed their headquarters in Lusaka. At present 25 NGOs
register in the steering committee of CSPR. Including those not belonging to the steering committee,
about 90 groups affiliate (Mpepo & Seshamani 2005). CSPR also produced a civil society version of
PRSP (“A PRSP for Zambia: A Civil Society Perspective”) and delivered it to the Minister of Financeand National Planning. Mr. Mpepo, who is the coordinator of CSPR, acknowledges that “PRSP of
Zambia to a sizable extent reflects the opinion of civil society regarding poverty reduction.1䋩”(2)Agricultural development plans
In 1992, the Zambian government, together with the implementation of structural adjustment

policies, started the reform of agricultural sector policies. The cruxes were the liberalization ofagricultural sector and the promotion of entry of private enterprises into such activities as production,
distribution and financing.
㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㪈㧕
CSPR raises the following issues: (i) it is time-consuming and insufficient to provide information to the civilsociety from the government; (ii) a gap between the budget allocation and the actual expenses; (iii) themarginalized people and the poor, despite they are the target of PRSP, are hardly involved in PRSP, and remain
in indirect relationship through civil society organizations and others; and (iv) members of parliament are hardly
involved in PRSP (Mpepo & Seshamani 2005).
㩷

 

In 1996, the Agricultural Sector Investment Programme (ASIP) was launched. ASIP set thefollowing five objectives: (a) food security; (b) generation of income and employment; (c)maintenance and improvement of such agricultural resource base as land and water; (d) to contributeto industrial development; and (e) expansion of exports of agricultural products. In order to achievethese objectives, 10 strategies were set up. They are: liberalization of agricultural markets;diversification of crop production;, development of the livestock sector; emphasizing services tosmallholders; expanding economic opportunities for outlying areas; improving the economic status of
women; improving the use of the available water resources; , full utilization of land suitable for
agriculture; measures against natural disasters; and sustainable agriculture (PRSP 2002-2004). While
in ASIP it was considered to be the indispensable prerequisites to restructure the Ministry ofAgriculture and Cooperatives,, and to promote the decentralization, the insufficient understanding
among the staff regarding ASIP, compounded by a delay of training and the anxieties for their futureso that they may be dismissed, the restructuring of the ministry has not proceeded, and the expected
outcome has not fully been achieved.
The Agricultural Commercialization Programme (ACP) 2002-2005 was formulated as the
successive programme of ASIP which terminated in 2001, and it kept the linkage with the plan of
agricultural sector in PRSP.
In the PRSP 2002-2004, the agricultural sector was expected to focus on: (a) accomplishment ofpolicy reform initiated at the beginning of the 1990s; (b) building and reform of legal systems(defining the distribution policies of agricultural inputs and products); and (c) increase in the
production and productivity and competitiveness of agriculture.
In 2004, the National Agricultural Policy 2004-2015 (NAP) was established. The basics of NAP
are liberalization, commercialization, linkage between the public and private sectors, and provision ofeffective services. Prospects envisaged by the NAP are to secure food supplies and to develop an
efficient, competitive and sustainable agriculture, which are able to contribute to GDP. The NAP
2004-2015 put up the following five priority objectives: (a) to ensure national and household foodsecurity; (b) contribution to industrial development; (c) increasing agricultural exports; (d) generationof income and employment opportunities; and (e) maintenance and improvement of agricultural
resource base.
For achieving the above five objectives, the NAP 2004-2015 presents 19 strategies. The main
strategies among others include: liberalization and private sector development; securing the quality
and sanitary and phytosanitary requirement of agricultural products for exports: strengthening
agricultural services for small scale farmers; arrangement of institutional and legal framework; accessto land; development of appropriate technology; promotion of gender equity; sustainable andenvironmentally sound agriculture; and so forth.

(3)

Forestry development plansA.

The Zambia forestry action plan
In Zambia, the forest and forestry administration has been conducted on the basis of the forest

policy formulated in 1965 and the Forest Law enacted in 1973. However in view of the noticeable
㩷

 

reduction in forest resources, with the funds of UNDP, the Dutch and Zambian governments, andassistance of FAO (the Tropical Forest Action Plan 1993-1998), the Zambia Forestry Action Plan(ZFAP) for 20 years from 2000 to 2020 was formulated. The overall goals of ZFAP include
enhancement of the contribution of forestry sector within socio-economic development, poverty
alleviation and improvement of food security.
In the action plan of ZFAP, there are the following four sub-programmes:
 Indigenous Forest Management and Biodiversity Conservation Programme Trees and Forest Development Programme Forest Industry Development Programme Woodfuel Energy Development
Moreover, as the institutional assistance for ZFAP, there are the following sub-programmes:
 Forestry Education and Training Programme Forestry Research and Extension Programme Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation ProgrammeMoreover in order to promote the private sector and NGOs to participate in sustainable forest
management, the sub-programmes focus on provision of incentives to the private sector andenhancement of the investment motivation.
B.

New forest policy
Based on ZFAP a new National Forest Policy was formulated in 1998. It aimed at establishing arational and sustainable protection, management, production and utilization of forest resources. Moreoverfor supporting this forest policy, a new Forest Act was enacted in 1999.

The principles of the Policy are as follows:(i)

Trees are important to environmental preservation, ecosystem conservation and sustainablesocio-economic development;(ii)

There is an inseparable relationship between humans, trees and land;(iii)

There in need to create responsible partnerships, with gender equity, among stakeholders inforestry activities, to ensure the permanence and stability of forests;(iv)

There is need to combine scientific and indigenous knowledge in the management andutilization of the forest resources; and(v)

There is need for enhanced private sector participation in forestry development.

Furthermore the Policy is expected to address the following four main areas:(i)Resource management and development
 Enhancement forest resources management
 Security of forest estates Expansion of plantations
 Ecosystem conservation
 Agro-forestry
 Forestry research and extension

㩷

 

(ii) Resource utilization
 Securing of sustainable utilization of such products as timber, wood fuel and other products
than wood(iii) Capacity building Capacity building of stakeholders by means of human resource development andinstitutional/structural reform(iv) Gender equality
 Securing the gender equality in decision making, extension, training and fund raising Building of women’s organizationsC.

The Forestry programme in the fifth national development plan
Based on ZFAP and the New Forestry Policy, the Fifth National Development Plan in the chapterof natural resources also formulates the programme for forests and forestry. The following shows theoutlines:(i)

Sustainable Indigenous Forest Resource Management
Objectives: Management and conservation of indigenous forest resources in a sustainable
mannerStrategies:
 Interdisciplinary integration of development projects concerning forest industries
 Implementation of sustainable forest management and conservation
 Strengthening protection and monitoring of forest resources(ii) Sustainable Wood Fuel Management
Objective: Promoting efficient use of wood energy and the alternative sources
Strategies:
 Promoting sustainable and participatory management of wood fuel
 Establishing fuelwood plantations
 Improving efficiency and technology of charcoal production/utilization
 Strengthening the collaboration with the Energy Regulation Board(iii) Industrial and Plantation Forestry
Objective: Enhancing the economic and social contribution of industrial and plantation
forestry
Strategies: Strengthening the commercial forestry
 Promoting the financing in the forestry sector
 Improving the access to information, market opportunities, trade channels and technology(iv) Private and Public Sector Capacity Building
Objective: Developing the efficient private sector concerning the processing and distribution
㩷

 

system of timber
Strategies:
 Promoting the outgrower scheme in the production and the cottage industry of natural
rubber Capacity building of forestry entrepreneurship Distributing the market information(v) Strengthening Community Based Forest Management
Objective: Building up the local forest governance through decentralization and community
based forest management
Strategies:
 Promoting joint management of forest resources
 Establishing community structures and developing skills
 Formulating joint forest management plans and putting in place appropriate legal
frameworks(vi) Agro-Forestry and Afforestation Programme
Objective: Strengthening the capacity of extension and research staff for actively promoting
agro-forestry and afforestation activities
Strategies:
 Establishing on-station and on-farm trials
 Promoting village nurseries and securing woodlots
 Formulating the integrated land utilization plans(vii) Strengthening Forestry Education and Training
Objective: Supporting the Zambia Forest College and the in-service training of its staff
Strategies: Rehabilitating college facilities and reviewing curricula Improving staff skills through staff development programmes
 Developing and implementing staff training programmes(viii) Supporting Forest Business Enterprises
Objective: Improving investment environment in the forestry sector and providing a support torural and urban livelihood through sustainable forest based enterprises
Strategies:
 Increasing the funds of Forest Development Credit Facility
 Promoting micro- and small-scale credit to rural based enterprises
 Promoting bee keeping and apiculture

㩷

 

(ix) Strengthening Forestry Research and Information Management System
Objective: Generating and maintaining the up-to-date forest data and information
Strategies:
 Implementing research programmes concerning inventories and assessment
 Conducting forest accounting and valuation
 Rehabilitating research facilities
 Establishing forest database

㩷

 

Chapter II㩷 Present Situation and Trend of Cooperation for
the Development of Agriculture and Forestry
1.

Present Situation of Cooperation for Development(1)

Cooperation of bilateral and multilateral donors/organizations

A. General trend
The Government of Zambia worked out the Poverty Reduction Strategic Paper (PRSP), theinitiative being taken by the World Bank, based on the Poverty Reduction Action Plan that wasformulated in May 1999. It then held the National Conference assembling the stakeholders, and after
obtaining their consensus, in May 2000 the government cabinet meeting as well as the IMF/ WorldBank approved PRSP.
In February 2007, the Fifth National Development Plan (FNDP 2006-2010) was approved. WhilePRSP was prepared in focusing on poverty reduction, FNDP, aiming “to create the broad based wealthand employment through citizens’ participation and technology progress”, states the importance tosimultaneously achieve economic growth and poverty reduction. It also regarded the development of
economic infrastructure and human resources as the strategic viewpoints, and defined education,
healthcare, infrastructure and agriculture as the priority areas.
At present in Zambia, in parallel with the formulation of the Fifth National Development Plan,
the aid coordination among donors is making a progress in many sectors, thus the government, withthe support of each donor, formulates the Joint Assistance Strategy of Zambia (JASZ) 1䋩, which aims at
harmonizing the aid procedures for achieving the goals of the State Development Plan. The JASZ
claims the aid toward the general fiscal assistance, introduction of the lead donor formula, and thedivision of labor among responsible sectors. It is also formulating the Minute of Understanding inevery sector for achieving the above ideas at sector level (The MOUs of education, healthcare andassistance to the private sector were already formulated). Main objectives of aid coordination are toprevent from aid flooding caused by unorganized aid of many donors, to reduce the transaction costs(such as time, provision of special treatment, personnel cost etc.), and to seek the alignment with thegovernment plans such as PRSP and the Fifth National Development Plan.
Japan signed the MOU of Initiative for Harmonization in Practice in 2004 for increasing theefficiency of aid. Moreover so as to promote the understanding concerning its aid policies andmodalities, Japan formulated the ODA Strategy Paper in cooperation with the Ministry of Finance,
which described the aid policies and future plans of Japan, thus made efforts to demonstrate its aid
policies.
On the other hand in the agriculture sector, while as the first sector-wide approach (the approachin which the government and donors share the sector development policies and implement theactivities in a consistent manner) in Africa, the above Agricultural Sector Investment Programme was㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㪈㧕
Roles played by the cooperating partners in JASZ are divided into three groups: lead donors, active donors andsilent (or background) donors. In the agricultural sector, Japan is taking the position as an active donor.
㩷

 

carried out for the period of 1996-2001 under the leadership of the World Bank. However due to a lackof concerted action among donors (Japan did not participate since it did not have an aid modality
corresponding to the general fiscal assistance and the common basket scheme – a common sharing offunds between the government and donors), and the shortage of fund management capacity at the sideof Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives, it did not bring out the fully satisfactory result. Under thecircumstance, FAO, the coordinator of donors in agricultural area, being skeptical to coordinated aid
so far, has not been active in the aid coordination. For the reason, the movement of aid coordination inagricultural area delays compared with other sectors, but is now obliged to go along with the rapid
trend of aid coordination since 2006.
At present, the movement of aid coordination is further advanced, such issues that how to hit abalance between the understanding/implementation of Japanese aid and the aid of fiscal assistancetype, and whether fiscal assistance should be carried out are under discussion mainly by the local
Japan’s ODA task force including the experts in agricultural area toward the implementation of more
effective and efficient aid.
In the agricultural sector, instead of FAO, the lead donors in the form of the troika system
consisting of Sweden, the US and the World Bank will work as the contact persons in the dialogues
with the Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives and play the coordinating role among donors. To be
noted that the troika system has a three-year term, and the chairman in the first year will be Sweden
then in the second year the US or the World Bank, but three years later, as part of the present members
may be replaced by other donors, thus a new troika system would be born.
Regarding the implementation system of projects, many donors establish Project Management
Unit (PMU) or Project Implementation Unit (PIU) independent from the existing administrative
organization, while the Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives assumes the overall responsibility.
Moreover many donors adopt the modality that the staff of Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives isseconded to a project for its implementation period, which is regarded as one of causes making theministry staff empty. It may also lead for donors to compete each other for recruiting the competentstaff at the Zambian side. The Japanese Government for its part nominates the staff of the ministry as
the counterpart (C/P) in setting the project office within the existing administrative organization,accordingly adopts a modality of project implementation in emphasizing the technology transfer to C/P.
It is only the Japanese Government among main donors that adopts such a modality.
B.

Bilateral cooperation
In the agricultural area, those undertaking the aid in a large scale are the bilateral aid agencies

mainly of the West and North European countries, and the international organizations such as theWorld Bank, the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) and the African
Development Bank (AfDB).
Sweden (Sida) implements the Agriculture Support Programme (ASP), the largest among thebilateral aid. Although not as large as in size, the Netherlands and the Northern European countries
like Norway have a long history of aid activities in Zambia, thus achieve a certain outcome in the
agricultural sector. USAID carries out, not a direct aid to the government, but mainly the direct
㩷

 

assistance to private sector though NGOs like the Cooperative League of USA (CLUSA). Agriculturalprojects under implementation by country are as follows:(i) Sweden (the Swedish International Development Agency: Sida)
The goal of Sida in Zambia is to reduce poverty through the initiatives in healthcare, agriculture,
infrastructure and commerce.
One of the Sida projects for 2003-2007 and under implementation is the Agricultural Support
Programme (ASP). The objectives of ASP are, as those described in PRSP, to contribute to foodsecurity, employment generation and poverty reduction. Its main components are as follows:(a) Encouragement of agricultural production through crop production (including an increase
in seed production, crop diversification and postharvest)(b) Encouragement of land management (including farming methods for soil conservationand control of soil erosion and drainage)(c) Encouragement of agribusiness including training about business and management(including income generation activities, agriculture as a business, market research andinitiating enterprises)(d) Linkage with wholesale purchasers, micro-finance and outgrower managers (smallholder
farmers in 20 districts of Central, Eastern, Northern and Southern Provinces comprise thetarget group)(ii) Germany (the German Technical Cooperation: GTZ)
Zambia is one of the priority countries of GTZ, which has carried out the cooperation activities
for 28 years in Zambia in such areas as decentralization, water resource and governance. During theperiod of West Germany, the integrated agricultural cooperation for North-Western Province was theprincipal activity, while at present, in the framework of the “Assistance for Community Developmentin the Decentralization of Southern Province” which aims at the empowerment of smallholder farmers,
subject to Choma, Mazabuka, Monze and Sinazongwe Districts in Southern Province, the assistanceincluding participatory extension services, farming methods for soil conservation, business
management, seed multiplication and provision of community development fund is being carried out.
This project, started in 2004 and terminated in 2006, is now being planned to extend to the wholecountry.
(iii) The Netherlands
The Dutch cooperation in agricultural sector aims at encouraging the private sector in providing
an environment so as to easily enter into the sector. Specifically it conducts: (a) assistance to researchdevelopment to various agricultural research stations and the Golden Valley Agricultural Research
Trust (GART); (b) assistance to agricultural and rural development focusing on Western Province
conducted by the Netherland Development Organization (SNV); (c) assistance for improving
livelihood of rural residents in utilizing the information communications technology (ICT); (d)assistance to the training such as the Natural Resource Development College (NRDC), the Zambia
㩷

 

Export Growers Association (ZEGA), the Training Trust (NZTT) and the Zambia National Farmers
Union (ZNFU); and (e) financing assistance to the market access for the Livestock Development Trust(LTD) together with USAID, NORAD and Denmark.
(iv) USA (United States Agency for International Development: USAID)The Strategic Plan for Zambia of USAID (2002-2010) has the following five strategies: (a)strengthening the competiveness of private sector in the areas of agriculture and natural resources; (b)improvement of the quality of basic education for school children; (c) improvement of the healthsituation of Zambian people; (d) maintenance of reliable government; and (e) reducing the impact of
HIV/AIDS.
These strategic objectives of the Plan to provide competitiveness to agriculture and natural
resources correspond with the principles and practices of programmes of Zambian government. In
realizing these objectives, the following four consequences would be brought up: (a) enhanced accessto markets; (b) promotion of value added products and service technology; (c) enhanced access tofinancing measures and business development; and (d) improvement of the growth environment.
At present, USAID is implementing: the assistance to the Agricultural Consultative Forum(ACF); promoting toward the market economy through the assistance to CLUSA, ZNFU, CARE, theZambia Agribusiness Technical Assistance Center (ZADAC) and private sector; and the financial
assistance to the Regional Research Network of Southern Africa.
(v) Norway (Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation: NORAD)
All funds of the Norwegian cooperation are basically passed through Sweden Sida, theNetherlands, ZNFU and the Programme Against Malnutrition (PAM), etc. Norway cooperates mainlyin the areas of education, governance, roads and natural resource management (especially wildlife). In
the agricultural sector, financial assistance to ZNFU (for its activity of the farming methods for soil
conservation) and PAM, and for encouraging dialogues between the public and private sectors, andassistance to ACF together with the Netherlands and USAID.
(vi) UK (Department of International Development: DFID)
DFID formulated the Zambia Strategic Plan in 1999. The Plan corresponds with the then National
Poverty Reduction Action Plan and has the four priority areas: governance, health, education and
HIV/AIDS, and focuses on the implementation stage of the Poverty Reduction Strategy. It also aims at
improving the livelihood of the poor in rural and urban areas. The priority elements include: (a)generating the partnership in the city suburbs; (b) activation of communities, road construction andwater supply in Northern Province; and (c) anti-drought measures and the damage reduction inSouthern Province.
However, the project of DFID under implementation is limited to the assistance to the Monthly
Crop Monitoring Survey conducted by the Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives in cooperation
with FAO.

㩷

 

(vii) Finland
The ongoing project of Finland is solely one project, the cooperation in the areas of fisheries,
aquaculture, markets and information communications in the framework of a rural village
development plan in Luapula Province to be implemented from March 2006 to February 2010. Yet the
Finnish cooperation in Luapula Province has been carried out for more than 25 years.
C. Multilateral cooperation
The World Bank, which has a considerable leverage in the development trend of agricultural
sector, just started in 2006 a five-year project aiming at the commercialization of smallholder farms
named the Agricultural Development Support Project (ADSP). Moreover in 2006 IFAD also approved
a seven-year project called the Smallholder Livestock Investment Programme, which aimed atlivestock hygiene and re-stocking for encouraging the use of animal draft power. ADB for its part isabout to start a five-year project called the Smallholder Agricultural Production and Marketing
Support Project, a project assisting the production and marketing of smallholders.
(i) The World Bank
The overall goal of the World Bank assistance is to promote the growth, production
diversification and exports in integrating such policies as HIV/AIDS, gender and environment for
improving the dissemination of social services. Moreover the strategic goals of World Bank are
specified that: (a) sustainable economic growth under a diversified export-oriented economy; (b)livelihood improvement and protection of disadvantaged people; and (c) private sector managed
effectively and efficiently.
The representative project of World Bank under implementation is the Agricultural Development
Support Programme (ADSP) started from June 2006. Since 2002 the Ministry of Agriculture andCooperatives prepared the ADSP as the successive programme of ASIP, and in January 2004 in
consultation with a World Bank mission it changed the project title to the ADS Project (ADSP) withthe following three objectives:(a) Enhancing the productivity of smallholders production system, which is expected to leadto the food security and increase in the income(b) Assistance to the agricultural research with competiveness and in emphasizing on
outcomes, strengthening decentralized extension services at the level of district, block andcamp, and strengthening smallholder farmers within rural communities throughagricultural infrastructure and capacity building(c) Strengthening the capacity of agricultural organizations in the areas of policy analysis,
programme implementation and monitoring/evaluation
Three components of ADSP and their respective cost estimates are as follows:
Component 1: Assistance to farmers and agribusiness USD 33,200,000㩷Financing scheme for supply chains

USD 12,200 ,000

Market improvement facilities

USD 6,000,000Develop a network of farm roads

USD 15,000,000 Component 2: Institutional development

USD 3,900,000

Component 3: Project management and coordination

USD 2,600,000

Total USD 39,600,000 (in which foreign exchange USD 37,200,000)(ii) The International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD)
IFAD has the mission to fight the starvation in developing countries and the poverty in rural area.
As the recent strategies for Zambia, IFAD has been assisting such areas as implementation of foodsecurity, reduction of vulnerability through support services, improvement of access to productive
assets and technological knowledge, and diversification of revenue sources. IFAD is also focusing its
assistance on strengthen the linkage between smallholders and supplier side. Other areas include thesmallholder livestock sector, natural resource management including farming method of soil
conservation, and commercialization of smallholders. Its major projects are as follows:(a) Forest Resource Management Programme (2002-2008)
Cost Estimates: USD 12,630,000
Responsible administration: the Ministry of Tourism, Environment and Natural
Resources.
(b)

Smallholders Enterprise and Marketing Programme: SHEMP(2000-2008).

Cost estimates: USD 15,940,000
Components:
Assistance

for

the

developmentofgroupsofsmall

enterprises

including for strengthening formation of local NGOs


Construction of access roads, assistance for small-scale intermediate traders,development of market linkages including market diversificationAssistance to policy and legal systems

After completing the project, a termination evaluation will be held in September 2007.
(c) Small-Scale Livestock Investment Programme (2007-2014)
Cost estimates: USD 10,110,000
Components:
Capacity development of animal disease control in the public sector



Vaccination against the East Coast fever and its researchVaccination against the contagious bovine pleuropneumonia and its
surveillance

Project staff has been selected and the project will start soon.
(d) Village Financing Programme (2007-2013)
Cost estimates: USD 13,810,000 (co-financed with Sida)
The project was already approved by IFAD, but, as the project staff is underrecruitment, it has not started yet.
(iii) The African Development Bank (AfDB)
The strategy of AfDB for Zambia, as the basis of reduction of rural poverty, food security andacceleration of sustainable growth of the whole economy, is to achieve a broad based growth of
㩷

 

agriculture through the increase in agricultural productivity and income of smallholders as the key area
within the agricultural sector. This strategy should be achieved by means of an intensive, expanded
and diversified agriculture for exports, and the promotion of market linkage between smallholders andstrengthened and expanded agribusiness.
(a) Smallholder Agricultural Production and Marketing Support ProjectThis five-year project (2006-2011) was formulated by a mission of the FAO Investment
Center in July 2003, and is now in the pipeline of AfDB financing.
The components are as follows:Size expansion of smallholders under the outgrower scheme

Promotion of production and supply of high quality seeds

and pollination

plantsLivestock veterinary services, extension services, setting up the organizations
for maintenance/management of irrigation facilities, setting up cooperatives,and capacity building within the Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives insuch areas as the standardization and grading of agricultural products

Survey regarding the large-scale farmland development for practicing asustainable commercial agricultureProvision of funds for project implementation and management

The total project cost is estimated to be USD 42 million, in which 90 % is for
production support corresponding to the above first and second components, and theremaining 10 % is for capacity building, survey and project management corresponding
to the above third, fourth and fifth components.
(b) Small-Scale Irrigation Project: SIP (2002-2008)
The project covers the three districts of Sinazongwe, Mazabuka and Chongwe. The
components include: establishing a small-scale irrigation plan; establishing a villagebank; strengthening the organization for the staff of the Ministry of Agriculture andCooperatives. Construction of an irrigation dam in Kanakantapa and Neganega areas is
being planned.
Cost estimates: USD 10,770,000(c) Zambia Agricultural Marketing, Processing and Infrastructural

Programme (ZAMPIP)

in Eastern Province and ASIP Support Programme (1999-2008)
Cost estimates: USD 30,300,000(iv) The European Union (EU)EU formulates a strategic paper for the assistance of Zambia during the period of 2001 to 2007,
which concludes the private sector as the main actor of economy. In the paper, three sectors –agriculture, mining and tourism – are selected as the most potential sectors for a balanced growth andprivate investment. EU has so far focused on transportation infrastructure, setting up of organizations,capacity building, support for macro-economy and other programmes (healthcare, HIV/AIDS andeducation).
㩷

 

In the strategic paper, in recognizing that poverty reduction in rural area depends on the sufficienttransportation infrastructure, three major interventions have been undertaken in the transportation
sector. They are: (a) preventive maintenance/management of trunk, main and district roads; (b)maintenance/management and rehabilitation of farm roads (or feeder roads); and (c) surveys
concerning the transportation modes (railway/road) and for their upgrading.
Major ongoing projects are as below:(a) Assistance to Soil Conservation Farming Units (2005-2008)
Cost estimates: Euro 1,970,000(b) Assistance to Agricultural Diversification and Food Security in Western andNorth-Western Provinces (2006-2013)
Cost estimates: Euro 1,500,000(c) Kaoma Rural Livelihood Improvement Programme (2003-2007)
Cost estimates: Euro 700 thousand(d) Export Development Programme II (2003-2007)
Cost estimates: Euro 6,500,000(v) The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO)
Until 2006 when the movement of aid coordination became active, FAO played the role ofcoordination and arrangement of donors in the agricultural area, and the intermediary between the
Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives and donors. As the assistance to the Ministry, FAO
undertook the emergency aid after droughts in the forms of planting materials and other agricultural
inputs, and an aid by means of capacity building. At present, it carries out the assistance to agriculturalextension activities through technological dissemination like the soil conservation farming method.
Main projects under implementation are as follows:(a) Project for Food Security and Nutrition Action and Communication in Luapula Province(2003-2007).
Cost estimates: USD 2,380,000(b) Oil Palm Planting/Processing in Luapula Province for Food Security and Nutrition
Improvement (2003-2007).
Cost estimates: USD 314,000(c) Institutional Building in Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives for the Purpose ofMonthly Cropping Survey (2006-2009).
Cost estimates: USD 570,000(d) Emergency Assistance to Early Finding and Prevention of Avian Influenza (2005-2007)
Cost estimates: USD 400,000(e) Capacity Building for Promoting of forming Cooperatives of Smallholders (2006-2007)
Cost estimates: USD 328,000(f) Livelihood Improvement in SADC countries Through Food Security and Nutrition
Improvement (2005-2007)
Cost estimates: USD 12,200,000
㩷

 

(g) Assistance to Cassava Production/Processing for Employment Generation (2006-2008)
Cost estimates: USD 335,000(h) Food Security Project of Cassava Farming (2006-2008)
Cost estimates: USD 750,000
D.

Agricultural policies and strategies of Zambian Government
After the Mwanawasa Government took over in January 2002, the Government of Zambia has

placed three sectors as the priority areas: agriculture, mining/manufacturing and tourism, which should
contribute to the economic growth. Since the Government launched the National Agricultural Policy inDecember 2004, it has been taking efforts to put the strategies and plans in line with the Policy into
effect.
(i) The National Agricultural Policy
The national agricultural plan was formulated by the former Chiluba Government at the end of
1997, but its draft plan was not approved by the cabinet, thus a broad redrafting was made, yet as the
Mwanawasa Government was born in January 2002, even the revised one was not approved. In therevised draft plan, the following policies were emphasized: promotion of export crops, resolution ofdual structure, regulation on genetically engineered crops, preservation of genetic resources, focus onsustainable agriculture, and to this effect the soil conservation farming method and appropriatetechnology.
Afterward under the agricultural minister, Mr. Sikatane, of the new government, further revisions
were added, then a draft plan covering for 13 years period of 2003-2015 was at last completed in
September 2003, which finally became the National Agricultural Plan 2004-2015, and approved by the
Parliament in December 2004.
The vision of the plan states that “to promote the development of an efficient, competitive andsustainable agriculture that secures food security and increased income”. Further the vision at the sametime is assumed to contribute to “poverty reduction and economic growth”, the overall goal of PRSP(Poverty Reduction Strategic Paper). Comparing with the draft produced in the former government,
NAP adds the following five sub-sectors: (a) irrigation; (b) land utilization; (c) farm mechanization;(d) development of cooperatives; and (e) training of agricultural cooperative staff.
NAP stresses increase in production, liberalization and commercialization of the agricultural
sector, promotion of the partnership between the public and private sectors, the provision of effective
agricultural services, which would lead to sustainable agriculture. By means of the implementation ofthese measures, it further states that the distribution of agricultural inputs and the government
interventions to crop markets, which may disturb the entries of private sector, would not be necessary.
(ii) The Agricultural Commercialization Programme (ACP): 2002-2005
ACP was formulated as the successive programme of the Agricultural Sector Investment
programme (ASIP), which terminated in December 2001, and at the same time designed as a main
vehicle for implementing the agricultural components of PRSP into practice. However because ASIP
㩷

 

ended unsatisfactorily ACP as well could not obtain enough financial supports from donors, thus itreached to the expiring date only in the form of draft. At present, within the Ministry of Agriculture
and Cooperatives, ACP is simply positioned as a guideline for promoting commercialization ofagriculture.
The principal objective of ACP is to promote of the development led by the competitive private
sector, hence it has such components as promotion of agribusiness, agricultural credit anddevelopment of agricultural infrastructure.
(iii) The Five-Year Strategic Plan of the Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives: 2006-2010
This Plan is a strategic plan of the Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives formulated every five
year starting from 1994. The Plan includes a review of the activities in the past five years by the seniorstaff of the Ministry and a strategic plan for the coming five years. As the five-year plan for 2001-2005
terminated, on the basis of the outcomes of the workshop held in August 2005, the five-year strategicplan for 2006-2010 was formulated, and at present it is under implementation. At the workshop, a
SWOT (Strength, Weakness, Opportunities and Threats) analysis was introduced, and the SWOT of
the Ministry was analyzed by the staff themselves, and the review of each department and the strategy
for forthcoming five years were proposed.
(iv)

The Fifth National Development Plan (FNDP)
The FNDP is the successive plan of the Transitional National Development Plan (TNDP,

2002-2006). Although its finalization considerably delayed, after the discussion concerning the draft
held at the stakeholder meeting, it was finally approved by the Parliament in February 2006.
Regarding the chapter of agricultural sector, it basically corresponds with the direction of the above
NAP, but in case of FNDP, each sector was worked out in detail at the respective Sector Advisory
Groups (SAGs), which were established by donors concerned when FNDP was formulated. Therefore
all projects including those funded by donors would need to be positioned within the FNDP
programmes (the alignment with FNDP in JASZ).
In this connection, the Fertilizer Support Programme, which is a subsidy scheme of agricultural
inputs (the subsiding rate: 50%) to smallholders with the aim of food security, has called for more thanhalf of the total budget of Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives. Since it has so far been the targetof criticism of major donors for the reason that it skews the market, it would be reduced every year soas to eventually be abolished (In FNDP, the government budget for Fertilizer Support Programme will
not be included after 2009).

(2)

Cooperation of Japan

A. Performance record of the cooperation by type
The total amount of Japanese aid to Zambia, particularly in technical cooperation (Table II-1) has
been in a declining trend since the fiscal year (FY) 2002.㩷 However, including the amount of debt
relief, it considerably increased in 2005 when the Enhanced Heavy Indebted Poor Countries Initiative

㩷

 

started. On the other hand, the aid of other major donors has been in an increasing trend, consequently
the aid amount of Japan to Zambia ranked at the lowest among them in 2004. By sectors, while the aid
to education, healthcare, water resources and infrastructure have been expanding, that to agriculture
decreasing (Table II-3).
Table II-1㩷 ODA of Japan for Zambia䋨unit䋺¥ 100 million䋩
Technical
Assistance
18.17
16.19
17.25
15.94

FY 2002
FY 2003
FY 2004
FY 2005
Cumulative total
up to FY 2004

410.80Grant aid

Yen loans

22.57
18.64
18.83
32.80

0
0
0
0

949.11494.97

The technical assistance is based on the actual expenses of JICA.㩷 㩷 㩷
The grant aid and yen loans are based on the official letters of exchange.
For Zambia, a debt relief amounting to ¥70,776 million was forgiven in FY 2004.
Reference:
The assistance of bilateral donors (2005) (unit: USD million)
㽲US 97.42㩷 ԙUK㩷 57.16㩷 ԚDenmark㩷 43.70㩷 ԛNorway㩷 30.58㩷 ԜSweden㩷 29.66 ԝJapan㩷 29.10
UK, Norway and EU provide the general fiscal assistance. USAID provides the assistance to the sector pooling
fund.
Table II-2㩷 Record of JICA performance to Zambia㩷 㩷䋨㩷 䋩: cumulative number in man/year
Technical cooperation
䋨J¥00 million䋩
Acceptance of trainees
䋨person䋩
Dispatch of experts (person)
Dispatch of study teams
䋨person䋩
Dispatch of JOVC䋨person䋩
Dispatch of Senior Volunteers
䋨person䋩
Provision of supplies
䋨J¥ million䋩
Technical Cooperation
Projects䋨No.䋩
Development Study Projects
䋨No.䋩

FY 2005

FY 2004

FY 2003

FY 2002

Cumulative
until FY 2005

15.94

17.46

16.19

18.17

394.8683(+13)141(䋫18)

157(䋫16)

150

1,631

29(+21)24(䋫19)24(䋫18)24

521

39(+2)

40

20(䋫10)50

1,302

64(+50)27(䋫57)24(䋫79)

45

952

6(+7)

1(䋫11)

5(䋫11)

517

107.42

156.39146.99140.045,150.46

Started 1
Continued 4Started 0Continued 0

Started 1
Continued 4Started 0Continued 0

Started 3
Continued 4Started 0Continued 0

60

Source: JICA Annual Reports

㩷

 

12
22

Table II-3㩷 Trend of aid amounts of Japan for Zambia: by sector (unit䋺USD 1,000)
2002
Agriculture
Healthcare
Education
Water
Infrastructure
Economy/fiscal and,governance
Other social sectors
Private sector
Debt relief

02298.4804900.24
12785.32

2003
2474.724580.075127.265164.28
12247.80

2004
2173.829998.80
1998.713086.871737.932005
3117.177772.035575.397589.10986.0101205.95

775.21

924.340027525.94

663.68665.662899.05

478.08275.020444.60430.70720081.74

Source: Ministry of Foreign Affairs, The Country Evaluation: Zambia

B. Positioning of the agriculture and forestry sector in Japan’s ODA
In the Country Aid Plan for Zambia formulated by Japanese Government in October 2002, thefollowing five priority areas are indicated:(i) Support for poverty alleviation focusing rural development(ii) Improvement of health care/medical services with enhanced cost-effectiveness(iii) Support for efforts to create a balanced economic structure(iv) Human resources development and institutional building to facilitate independent
development(v) Promotion of intraregional cooperation
Among the above five priority areas, those related to agriculture are covered under the above
areas of (i) and (iii). Specifically, under the above (i), (a) increase in agricultural productivity; (b)sustainable rural development; (c) dissolving the dual structure between urban suburbs and isolatedareas, and under the above (iii), such sub-priority areas as development of cultivation techniques,
storing and distribution technology of vegetables and promotion of livestock industry are listed.
As one of the characteristics of Japanese aid to the agriculture sector, it is observed that whileother main donors emphasize on “agricultural development”, Japan assists in centering on “ruraldevelopment”.
During the 1990s, Japan gave the largest amount of aid to the agricultural sector among donors,
thus, together with that of Sweden, two countries altogether accounted for over 80 % of total
agricultural assistance. However since Japan reduced the amount by about 50 % from 2002, it now
ranks at the sixth in terms of aid amount. USA ranks at the first, followed by Sweden, Germany,
Norway and Belgium. The reduction of Japanese aid was caused by the substantial reduction in foodaid and the aid for food production increase after 2002, which were carried out in the 1990s (source:
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Country Evaluation of Zambia).
C. Overview of cooperation programmes in the agricultural and forestry sector
In view that rural development closely relates to poverty reduction, Japan will actively engage insuch areas of cooperation as productivity increase, extension of agricultural technology, and building

㩷

 

of farmers’ organizations.
(i) Technical cooperation project: The Project for Participatory Village Development in Isolated
Areas (PaViDiA)
The project period:
1st Phase: June 2002-May 2007
2nd Phase: June 2007-May 2009
Project area: Chongwe in Lusaka Province and Mprokoso and Luwingu in Northern Province
Abstract: The project aims at building the capacity of rural residents far from markets toresolve their problems and strengthening the institutions for supporting the activities. It
undertakes participatory village development and the extension activities for sustainableagriculture, thus is expected to set up a practical model to coordinate these activities andestablish it in Zambia.
(ii) Technical cooperation project: The Project for the Improvement of Animal Health and Production
Delivery Extension Services
Project period: January 2006-January 2009
Project area: Seven districts in Southern Province and Sesheke

in Western Province

Abstract: The project aims at increasing the livestock production in Zambia throughenhancement of animal health technology in the livestock husbandry of Zambia. To thiseffect, the project collects and analyzes the information of livestock husbandry of Zambia,
and presents the diagnosis for resolving the problems. Moreover it holds local workshops
for improving the animal health, and conducts the extension of animal healthimprovement technology.
(iii) Technical cooperation project: Food Crop Diversification Support Project for Enhancement ofFood Security
Project period: October 2006-October 2011
Project area: Three districts in Eastern Province, two districts in Lusaka Province and three
districts in Southern Province
Project summary: Maize, the major crop in Zambia, is vulnerable to droughts, in facts its
production declined caused by the droughts from 2002, which brought a serious foodshortage. While in the recent several years the weather has been favorable and the output
increased, an agriculture biased toward maize is still difficult to cope with the vagaries ofweather. This project intends to diversify agriculture/food through the production increasein the drought tolerant food crops like cassava and sweet potatoes and the extension of
their processing technology, thus to provide a situation of stable food supply.
(iv) Technical cooperation project: Project for Development through Empowerment of Rural
Communities in the Zambia Initiative Areas
㩷

 

Project period: January 2006 - December 2008
Project area: Three districts in Western Province
Abstract: In January 2001, the Government of Zambia, in consideration of the linkage between
the humanitarian assistance to refugees and the development assistance in their recipientareas, started the Zambia Initiative (ZI), which intended to make the refugees participate
in the poverty countermeasures in the western part of the country, the recipient region of
the Angolan refugees. While many donors led by the United Nations High Commissioner
for Refugees (UNHCR) are providing assistance to such priority development sectors as
agriculture/livestock husbandry, healthcare, education and infrastructure, Japan, for its
part, in utilizing the know-how obtained in PaViDIA, implements a micro-project forcommunity development centering on agricultural development, and technical training toagricultural extension workers in Western Province, the recipient region of the Angolan
refugees, in targeting the resident refugees as well as local residents.
(v) Individual technical cooperation (training): Farmer-Based Aquaculture Training
Cooperation period: Starting in November 2005
Cooperation institute: The National Aquaculture Research and Development Center in
Copperbelt Province
Abstract: In the fishery sector, in the framework of the assistance to the Mwekera Fish
Culturing Station in Kitwe city, the provision of equipments/materials and the use ofcollateral funds were carried out in the past, then from 1994 to 1997 in the framework of
the fish propagation and culturing plan, an assistance was provided to the technology
transfers concerning the fish propagation and culturing, artificial feed manufacturing forfish culture, and plankton production for aquaculture. In Zambia, while fish is the main
protein source, the caching amount is declining thus the dependence on the propagationand culturing is rising, nevertheless due to the inappropriate technology it cannot copewith the demand. This training courses aim at giving the guidance of appropriatetechnology for those who engaging in small-scale fish propagation/culturing andenhancing the technique of extension workers of the Ministry of Agriculture andCooperatives. The training courses are expected to be held at the Mwekera Fish Culturing
Station.
(vi) Acceptance of trainees: Agricultural Extension of Zambia (special training courses to a country)
Period: 2000-2006 (seven times)
Quota to Zambia: 10 persons
Implementation agency: The JICA Obihiro International Center
Abstract: To implement training courses so that the extension workers could acquire theextension techniques to be applied in the field of Zambia

㩷

 

(vii) Development study project: Small-Scale Gravity Irrigation
Period: June 2007 (S/W agreement), the two and half years for the full-scale survey
Area: Northern Province and Luapula Province
Abstract: In targeting smallholders, the project is expected to identify an effective
community-based irrigation project in applying small-scale gravity irrigation, and toformulate an action plan for improving the agricultural productivity and profitability ofsmallholders.
(viii) Dispatch of expert: Adviser for Agriculture/Rural Development
Period: August 2003-August 2008
Dispatched agency: The Planning Department of Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives
Objective: To improve the capacities of policy planning, management and donor coordinationof the Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives(ix) Dispatch of the Japan Overseas Cooperation Volunteers (JOCV)At the time of March 2008, the following five volunteers in the agricultural sector are being
dispatched in field: extension workers on community development (2 persons), animalhusbandry (2 persons), and vegetables (1 person).

2.

Direction of International Cooperation(1)

Issues of agriculture and forestry development
Zambia has a land amounting to 752 thousand km2, about two times of Japan, in which 58 % isarable land (one-fifth of which is actually cultivated), and irrigable land of 423 thousand hectares (inwhich the current irrigated land is 100 thousand hectares). With a mild climate, vast cultivable land
and rich water resources, the country owns a high potential to development. Since the livelihood of
most Zambian people depends on the activities relating to agriculture, the development of agricultural
sector contributes to the welfare improvement of the Zambian people, and leads to the growth of GDP
and the expansion of employment. However the sector has various obstacles and limiting factors as
below.
They include: (a) low productivity (the use of animal draft power and mechanization does notadvance); (b) high dependence on rain fed agriculture, while irrigation is limited; (c) a high ratio of
post harvest loss; (d) lack of the forecast/warning systems; (e) low development of infrastructure andhigh cost of fuels and transportation; (f) lack of financing schemes targeting small- and medium-scale
farmers; (g) lack of agricultural markets for smallholders; (h) limited domestic market; (i) heavy
dependence on chemical fertilizer (j) gender related problems (k) the remaining traditional land tenuresystem (most land remains under traditional chieftains; (l) low utilization rate of land/water resources;(m) high dependence on production and consumption of maize; (n) continuing dual structure since thecolonial era; (o) underdevelopment of cooperative activities; and (p) unsustainable agricultural
practices destroying the environment (excessive forest cutting, and the unconventional slash-and-burn

㩷

 

farming practice with a short fallow period).

(2)

Direction of Japanese cooperation
The Government of Japan defines five priority areas in providing the Zambian aid, in which thoserelated to the agricultural sector are “Support for poverty alleviation focusing rural development” and“encouraging an agriculture responding to the market economy”. The author considers that on one
hand the programmes for achieving “Support for poverty alleviation focusing rural development” arerequired to include (a) Rural development programme and (b) Food security promotion programme,on the other hand “Nurturing agriculture corresponding to the market economy” to include (c)Sustainable agricultural production programme” (reference: Fig. II-1: Chart of Agricultural Strategy
for Zambia).
Cooperation of Japanese Government specifically the cooperation of JICA in the agricultural
sector has so far been undertaken in focusing on the assistance to PaViDIA in line with “poverty
alleviation focusing rural development” among the five priority areas of the assistance to Zambia. On
the other hand, the Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives of Zambian Government acknowledges
the agriculture as a profit making business, not as a social welfare activity, and aims at developing anefficient and competitive agriculture leading to the economic growth, which is clearly explained in theabove National Agricultural Policy as well as the Fifth National Development Plan.
Major donors as well as the Government of Japan, while in putting poverty reduction as theoverall goal, provide the assistance with a clear policy that the commercialization of smallholder
agriculture should contribute to the economic growth of Zambia. Under the circumstances, theagricultural strategy of Japanese Government is needed to implement, in addition to the assistance to“Poverty alleviation in rural areas” to date, the assistance to “Nurturing agriculture corresponding tomarket economy”, which eventually contributes to poverty countermeasures.
In order to achieve “Development of an agriculture responding to market economy”, it isnecessary to develop a stable, sustainable and highly productive agriculture, which should be
supported under “Sustainable agricultural production programme”.
In concrete terms, promotion of the projects centering on “Irrigation development”, one of thepriority subsectors of Government of Zambia, is considered to lead to a stable, sustainable and highly
productive agriculture. In this case, however, instead of the conventional large-scale irrigation
infrastructure,which

requiresagreat

amount

of

costs

for

its

construction

andmaintenance/management, it may be appropriate to assist such as the software side like the creation ofa social system of irrigation sector, and the development of irrigation techniques in an appropriate size
so that smallholders could build them in using locally available supplies and easily maintain andmanage by themselves (Fig. II-1: “Peri urban irrigation scheme development”). Moreover, theirrigation development targeting the emerging smallholder farmers in the areas along the north-south
trunk roads and lines rail and around cities (Fig. II-1 “Irrigation development in city suburbs”), and arealization of the Farm Block Concept1䋩 (Fig. II-1: Assistance to farm blocks”), which assumes the㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㪈㧕
The farm block concept is a resettlement plan for employment generation and rural development. The block
㩷

 

coexistence between small/medium-scale farms and large-scale farms through the outgrower scheme,are exactly in line with the government direction toward agricultural commercialization, thus theassistance of Japan to these areas should be highly appropriated.
In Africa, while there are many successful cases of agricultural commercialization are found insuch crops as cocoa, cotton, fresh vegetables and cutting flowers, they should ensure a sustainableeconomic growth of countries concerned, and lead to poverty reduction. Thus in future, it isconsidered that, in ensuring the alignment with Fifth National Development Plan and the National
Agricultural Policy, the formulation of profitable and sustainable projects through thecommercialization of agriculture is required.
ƐƐŝƐƚĂŶĐĞƚŽĂŐƌŝĐƵůƚƵƌĂůĂƌĞĂĨŽƌĂŵďŝĂ

EƵƌƚƵƌŝŶŐŽĨĂŐƌŝĐƵůƚƵƌĞĐŽƌƌĞƐƉŽŶĚŝŶŐƚŽƚŚĞŵĂƌŬĞƚĞĐŽŶŽŵǇ

^ƵƉƉŽƌƚĨŽƌWŽǀĞƌƚǇĂůůĞǀŝĂƚŝŽŶĨŽĐƵƐŝŶŐŽŶƌƵƌĂůĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ

ZƵƌĂůĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚƉƌŽŐƌĂŵŵĞ

&ŽŽĚƐĞĐƵƌŝƚǇĞŶŚĂŶĐĞŵĞŶƚƉƌŽŐƌĂŵŵĞ

^ƵƐƚĂŝŶĂďůĞĂŐƌŝĐƵůƚƵƌĂůƉƌŽĚƵĐƚŝŽŶƉƌŽŐƌĂŵŵĞ

WƌŽũĞĐƚĨŽƌWĂƌƚŝĐŝƉĂƚŽƌǇǀŝůůĂŐĞĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚŝŶŝƐŽůĂƚĞĚĂƌĞĂƐ

&ĞƌƚŝůŝǌĞƌƐƵƉƉŽƌƚƉƌŽũĞĐƚĨŽƌƐŵĂůůͲƐĐĂůĞĨĂƌŵĞƌƐ;Ϯ<ZͿ/ŵƉƌŽǀĞŵĞŶƚŽĨĂŶŝŵĂůŚĞĂůƚŚĂŶĚƉƌŽĚƵĐƚŝŽŶĚĞůŝǀĞƌǇĞǆƚĞŶƐŝŽŶƐĞƌǀŝĐĞƐ

WĞƌŝƵƌďĂŶŝƌƌŝŐĂƚŝŽŶĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚZƵƌĂůĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚƚŚƌŽƵŐŚĞŵƉŽǁĞƌŵĞŶƚŽĨƌƵƌĂůĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƚŝĞƐŝŶĂŵďŝĂ/ŶŝƚŝĂƚŝǀĞ

&ŽŽĚĐƌŽƉĚŝǀĞƌƐŝĨŝĐĂƚŝŽŶƐƵƉƉŽƌƚƉƌŽũĞĐƚ

^ŵĂůůͲƐĐĂůĞŝƌƌŝŐĂƚŝŽŶĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚƐƚƵĚǇ

/ƌƌŝŐĂƚĞĚĂŐƌŝĐƵůƚƵƌĞĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚŝŶƚŚĞĂŵďĞǌŝZŝǀĞƌďĂƐŝŶ

/ŶͲĐŽƵŶƚƌǇĨĂƌŵͲďĂƐĞĚĂƋƵĂĐƵůƚƵƌĞƚƌĂŝŶŝŶŐ

^ƵƉƉŽƌƚĨŽƌĨĂƌŵďůŽĐŬƐĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ

ĚǀŝƐŽƌƐƚŽĂŐƌŝĐƵůƚƵƌĞͬƌƵƌĂůĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚNote:ƉƌŽũĞĐƚƐƵŶĚĞƌŝŵƉůĞŵĞŶƚĂƚŝŽŶͬĂĚŽƉƚĞĚ

WƌŽũĞĐƚƐǇĞƚƚŽďĞĂĚŽƉƚĞĚŽƌďĞŝŶŐƌĞƋƵĞƐƚĞĚ

Figure II-1 Map of Japan’s agricultural strategies for Zambia㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷with a size of above 100,000 hectares would be established one in each province, where a core venture is placed
as the nucleus, and small/medium-scale farmers and large-scale farmers operate the agriculture in harmony
through the outgrower scheme. The government prepares the basic infrastructure. At present, three out of nine
blocks are under development.
㩷

 

References
Development Programme
1. Mpepo, B. P. 2003 “Civil Society Engagement in Zambia’s Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper
process: Bringing on board the voices of the poor”, paper presented at a regional workshop.
2. Mpepo, B. P. & Seshamani, V. 2005 “Zambia’s PRSP process: from exclusion to inclusion,
confrontation to cooperation?” Participatory Learning and Action 51, April 2005.
3. O'Neil et al. 1987 Transforming a Single-Product Economy: An Examination of the First
Stage of Zambia’s Economic Reform Program, 1982-86. Economic Development Institute,World Bank
4. Thurlow, J. & Wobst, P. 2004 ‘The Road to Pro-Poor Growth in Zambia: Past Lessons andFuture Challenges’ (Operationalising Pro-Poor Growth: A Country Case Study on. Zambia)
Paper submitted to the DFID
5. World Bank, Zambia Poverty Assessment.
6. Zambia (Ministry of Finance and National Planning) 2002 ‘Zambia Poverty Reduction
Strategy Paper 2002-2004’. Lusaka
7. Zambia 2006 ‘Fifth National Development Plan 2006-2010’

Soil
1. D.B.Dadal-Clayton et al.1985 : A geomorphic legend for Zambia, In Proceedings of 㸑thInternational Forum on Soil Taxonomy and Agrotechnology Transfer, Zambia, pp.76-11
2. L.Chileshe and W.Ting-tiang 1985: The geology of Zambia, ibid., pp. 66-75
3. Sigeru Araki 2001:Soils in Tropics, Ed.K.Kyuma :Soil Science for Tropics , pp.37-110 (inJapanese), Nagoya Univ. Press
4. S.B.Sokotela 2001 : Soils of Zambia, Technical Bulletin 2001 (Unpublished, Draft paper)
5. R.Msoni 2000: Agro-Ecological Regions of Zambia:Their Soils(Unpublished, Draft paper)
6. Togo Tsuji et al. 2005 : Studies on nutrient distribution in some Zambian soils with specialreference to sulphur using GIS(Geographic Information Systems). Part㸇Total sulphur
distribution in major Zambian soils. Part㸈 Evaluation of plant available sulphur and its
distribution in major Zambian soils. Soil Sci.Plant Nutr., 51,935-942 and 943-952

Forestry
1. F.C. Njovu, 2004, Forest Certification in Zambia, Paper presented at the Symposium ofForest Certification in Developing and Transitioning Societies: Social, Economic, andEcological Effects
2. Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism, 2001, Forestry Outlook Studies in Africa (FOSA)
3. Republic of Zambia, 2006, Fifth National Development Plan 2006-2010
4. United Nations, 2002, Johannesburg Summit 2002: Zambia Country Profile
5. FAO㧦http://www.fao.org/forestry/site/

㩷

 

Development Cooperation
1. http://www.mofa.go.jp/mofaj/gaiko/oda/shiryo/hyouka/kunibetu/zanbia.html
2. JICA Zambia Office 2007, Maps & Profiles of Donor Funded Projects & Organizations in the
Agricultural sector in Zambia
3. Ministry of Finance and National Planning, 2006, Chapter 5 Agriculture in Fifth National
Development Plan 2006-2010
4. NEPAD and MACO, July 2007, CAADP Implementation in Zambia under the fifth National
Development Plan (FNDP) Zero Draft
5. JASZ, April 2007, Joint Assistance Strategy for Zambia (JASZ)
6. MACO and Agricultural Consultative Forum (ACF), August 2005, The National Agricultural
Policy : The Way Forward
߃޿ߑ

㩷

 