The role of agricultural support programmes on the livelihoods of smallholder maize farmers in Lesotho: asset utilisation, productivity and perceptions

The agricultural sector is widely considered an important contributor to economic development in least developed countries. It plays an important role in Lesotho and has been the backbone of rural activities and the prime employer of Basotho citizens. Smallholder farming is recognised by the government of Lesotho as a vehicle for addressing food security and poverty reduction. Maize is the principal staple crop produced by about 90 percent of farmers in Lesotho and it constitutes about 80 percent of the Basotho diet. Maize production is highly affected by climate change and is characterised by fluctuating yields because of erratic rainfall. In addition to unfavorable climate change, smallholder farmers in Lesotho experience challenges such as lack of farming inputs, limited access to markets and limited financial capital. These constraints confine them to a life of subsistence farming with low production and increased incidences of poverty. The government of Lesotho has intervened in the smallholder agricultural sector to stimulate production and productivity by introducing some agricultural programmes such as (i) the National Fertiliser and Input subsidy, (ii) the Smallholder Agricultural Development Programme, (iii) the National Block Farming, and (iv) the Integrated Watershed Management Programme. However, despite such government interventions, production in the smallholder agricultural sector continues to face recurring constraints. Studies on the National Block Farming Programme have showed that the programme has had limited impact on the livelihoods of smallholder farmers. Furthermore, farmers believe the Integrated Watershed Management Programme has a biased selection criteria as selection of areas is influenced by politicians who favour areas where they have a large political following and marginilise other areas. These concerns have also led to low participation rates in such programmes as wealthier, large scale farmers capture most of the benefits of government programmes. Disproportionate benefits of agricultural programmes to smallholder farmers imply that they continue to face the same constraints in production and have to find alternative ways of maintaining production and selling excess produce to sustain their livelihoods. The main goal of this research is therefore to study the livelihoods of smallholder maize farmers in Lesotho and how agricultural support programmes influence their production of maize. The study adopted a pragmatic mixed methods approach with a qualitative dominant sequential design. Accordingly, both quantitative and qualitative data was used to address the research goal. Quantitative data collected from the Lesotho Bureau of Statistics and the World Bank was used for trend analysis on maize productivity, temperature and rainfall over the period 1980-2016. Qualitative primary data was collected by conducting focus group discussions with smallholder maize farmers and key stakeholder interviews using the sustainable livelihood framework as a conceptual guide. The study comprised of a total of 85 research participants consisting of 75 smallholder maize farmers and 10 key stakeholders. Farmers were selected from 10 key maize producing areas in Leribe and Mafeteng districts in Leribe. Results revealed fluctuating maize productivity and productivity growth rates where such fluctuations are caused by government intervention and natural calamities in the form of erratic rains and dry spells. Droughts and late arrival of subsidised inputs are the chief constraints to maize production. In relation to livelihood assets, human and social assets are the more available assets relative to other assets (financial, natural and physical) of the sustainable livelihood framework. Furthermore, the National Fertiliser and Input subsidy Programme and the Smallholder Agricultural Development Programme are the most beneficial programmes to farmers livelihoods as they increase the accessibility of limited livelihood assets and therefore allowing farmers to achieve their livelihood goals. In contrast, the National Block Farming and the Integrated Watershed Management Programme are the least beneficial programmes to farmers’ livelihoods and are biased in their geographical targeting criteria. The study recommends that the government revises all selected support programmes in this study in areas warranting improvements so as to fairly and efficiently allocate resources that meet the needs of farmers. The study also recommends that farmers put more effort in adopting new technologies and strategies to improve production of maize in areas where government intervention has failed