CHIPINGE, Zimbabwe —
Gertrude Siduna appears to have little appetite for corn farming season.
Rather than prepare her land in Zimbabwe’s arid southeastern Chipinge district for the crop that has fed her family for generations — and bitter about repeated droughts that have decimated yields — she turns her thoughts to the prices for chilies and techniques for growing them.
“I pick my chilies from the fields and take them to the processing center close to my home. It’s simple,” said Siduna, 49. She’s received about $400 from the drought-resistant crop and plans to grow more. “Chilies are far better than corn.”
Siduna has been growing chilies for a year since being trained under a climate-smart agriculture program funded by the U.S. Agency for International Development. The program was designed to strengthen small-scale farmers’ resilience to climate change-induced droughts, many requiring food assistance from the government or international donors.
But as climate change worsens droughts and floods worldwide, government agencies and local operators have found that aid efforts can still be made more effective and financially sustainable.
Experts say rich nations like the United States, which have been the biggest contributors of planet-warming emissions historically, have a responsibility to fund humanitarian aid in the countries that are experiencing its effects first and most severely.
The U.S. is the world’s largest international donor of food aid, reaching over 60 million people in about 70 countries annually with direct contributions of food or via programs to help farmers adapt to extreme weather. USAID plans to mobilize $150 billion for climate-related initiatives, according to the agency’s climate strategy report.
In Zimbabwe, around 7.7 million people — almost half the country’s population — require food assistance, according to government and U.N. figures. Frequent droughts are decimating people’s ability to feed themselves, a phenomenon worsened by climate change.
Switching crops
Water-guzzling white corn has been the staple crop of choice for rural farmers in Zimbabwe since its introduction to much of sub-Saharan Africa by the Portuguese in the 17th century.
But with the threat of drought, some, like Siduna, now think it may be better to buy the staple than grow it.
“I don’t lack corn meal. I just use my earnings from chilies to buy it from the local shops,” she said.
Unlike corn or other crops that she has typically grown, chilies do well in the hotter, drier conditions. And, because they end up in stores in the United States, they offer cash rewards.
“You have to continuously pray for the rain if you grow corn,” said the mother of three. “The crop just can’t stand heat. But chilies can. One is assured of a harvest, and the market is readily available.”
Other crops such as millets, which are cereals tolerant of poor soils, drought and harsh growing conditions, are also gaining traction under climate resilience programs.
In Chiredzi, southeast Zimbabwe, Kenias Chikamhi, 54, describes growing corn as “a gamble … whereas with millets you have a good chance of at least getting something.” Millet was the country’s staple before the introduction of maize.
But not all the corn is gone yet. Zimbabwe’s agriculture ministry says it plans to increase land under maize to 1.8 million hectares (4.4 million acres) by using farming techniques such as digging holes into dry land and mulching to cover the growing crops as well as by planting drought-resilient varieties that can better cope with the lack of rain.
The country harvested about 700,000 tons of corn this year, 70% down from the season before and far short of the 2 million tons required annually for humans and livestock.
Solar-powered irrigation
Farming techniques are also changing.
Another of USAID’s initiatives has seen a community garden in Mutandahwe village, where Siduna lives, irrigated by three small solar panels. The panels pump water from a borehole into storage tanks that are connected to the garden taps by pipes, turning the 1-hectare plot of vegetables like onions, leaf cabbage and cowpeas into an island of lush green.
Solar-powered community gardens have been spreading across the district and much of the country’s dry areas.
“We were struggling walking long distances to fetch water from rivers, and right now the rivers are dry,” said Muchaneta Mutowa, secretary of the plot. The plot is shared by 60 members, all growing vegetables they can eat and sell.
“We now have easy access to reliable water that flows from the taps [and] we don’t pay for the sun,” she said. And money from the sale of vegetables goes a long way to pay for family basics such as school fees.
Members pay a dollar each into a savings pot that can be used for low-interest loans or minor repair expenses “so that we are not always reliant on the donor,” said Mutohwa.
Increasing effectiveness
Because USAID’s investments can be so consequential for receiving countries, it’s important they’re done right, said Lora Iannotti, a professor who studies global maternal and youth nutrition at the Brown School at Washington University in St. Louis.
Richer countries like the U.S. have tended to use direct donations of surplus staple and commodity crops like corn and wheat as a way to benefit their own farmers, according to Iannotti’s research.
Iannotti has seen advances in food aid with dietary variety in mind but thinks there’s room for improvement. Undernourishment became more prevalent after the COVID-19 pandemic, and climate change is making hunger a more pressing issue than ever, with crises that resemble “stuff from 100 years ago,” she said.
Daniel Maxwell, a professor of food security at Tufts University, thinks countries providing aid also need strategies to address problems “causing the hunger in the first place,” whether that’s climate change, war or other factors. He also thinks countries need a more balanced approach, including projects promoting health, protection from violence or nutrition.
USAID and the U.S. Department of Agriculture haven’t yet explained how food aid efforts might be changed or altered by the incoming U.S. administration, but the delay on renewing farm legislation does hold up USDA programming, including food aid projects, in a variety of ways, said Alexis Taylor, undersecretary of trade and foreign agricultural affairs at USDA.
The U.S. Government Accountability Office, the investigative arm of Congress, released reports finding that USAID and its partner agencies needed to improve the ways they measured the outcomes of their programs.
USAID says they worked with the GAO to address its recommendations. The GAO has closed six of the eight recommendations, indicating satisfactory response; the others were to be resolved this fall, a spokesperson for USAID said.
“We are committing a lot of U.S. taxpayer dollars,” said Chelsa Kenney, the GAO’s director for international affairs issues. “It’s important that we’re good stewards of those taxpayer dollars to ensure that the kind of programming that we are providing to these countries is really making a difference.”
This post was originally published on here
