Chapter 6

Mechanized Rain-Fed Farming and Its

Ecological Impact on the Drylands
The Case of Gedarif State, Sudan

Yasin Abdalla Eltayeb Elhadary

Contents

6.1 Introduction........................................................................................................................... 121

6.2 Ecology of Drylands and Sudan............................................................................................ 123
6.3 Development of Mechanized Agriculture in Sudan.............................................................. 124
6.4 Fragility of Land Tenure Situation in Sudan......................................................................... 126
6.5 Impact of Semimechanized Farming on Environment and Development............................ 128
6.5.1 Clearance of Forest.................................................................................................... 128
6.5.2 Soil Depletion and Collapse of Yield Production...................................................... 130
6.5.3 Notion of Desertification in Sudan............................................................................ 131
6.6 Discussion: Mechanization and Its Socioecological Impact................................................. 132
6.7 Conclusions............................................................................................................................ 134
6.8 Summary............................................................................................................................... 134
References....................................................................................................................................... 134

6.1 Introduction

The agricultural sector is still the main economic driver for most developing countries, includ-
ing African countries, despite the discovery of oil in some, as in the case of Sudan. According to
the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) (2008), in Africa agriculture generates up to 50%
of gross domestic product (GDP) and contributes up to more than 80% of trade in value and more
than 50% of raw materials to industries. Besides, its contribution is vital in sustaining food security
AU: The sentence
and slowing down the increase of poverty, especially in rural areas. This implies that agriculture, beginning “This
particularly mechanized farming, is expected to play a major part in solving the food production implies” has been
changed. Please
problem in Africa. It is only through appropriate mechanization that African farmers will be able check the meaning.
to feed not only themselves but also the continent’s mushrooming urban population (FAO 2008).
Agriculture, the most important potential contributor to economic growth (Abu Raida 2013),
has not been given the attention it deserves from policy makers. Currently, this sector faces several
constraints that hinder its contribution to the economy of the African countries. These constraints

121

K22928_C006.indd 121 09/07/14 8:38 PM

 122 Agroecology, Ecosystems, and Sustainability

include, but are not limited to, declining productivity, price fluctuation, and massive land degrada-
tion. It is becoming a challenge for planners and decision makers to develop agriculture to meet
the ever-growing demand for food and at the same time to address its negative impact on the envi-
ronment. Without solving these problems, the capacity of land to secure livelihood and produce
enough food is questionable. The most pressing environmental threat in the twenty-first century is
not global warming, thinning ozone, or depleted energy sources. Rather, it is the decreasing amount
of land reserved for food production (Elhadary et al. 2013).
Like most African countries, Sudan’s economy is based heavily on agriculture, although the economic
return of this sector is declining sharply due to the emergence of the oil industry in 2000 (UNDP 2007).
The agricultural sector, with its various sections (traditional, semimechanized, irrigated, and livestock),
plays a vital role in securing a livelihood for 70% of the population, especially in rural areas. It also
contributes around 40% of the country’s GDP and more than 90% of the non-oil export earnings. In addi-
tion, about 80% of labor is employed in agricultural and related practices (Mustafa 2006), and agriculture
supplies about 60% of the raw materials needed by the manufacturing sector (Elbashir et al. 2004).
Generally, there are two types of rain-fed agriculture in the country: traditional farming and
semimechanized farming. The former comprises mainly subsistence systems, prevalent almost
everywhere in Sudan, accounting for an area of around 10 million hectares. This is how the major-
ity of rural people, mostly found in the Kordofan, Darfur, White Nile, and Blue Nile states, derive
their livelihood (UNDP 2007). The latter is mechanization of rain-fed agriculture, which was
initiated by the British in Gedarif in 1944 to meet the food needs of their army in East Africa
(Elhadary 2010; Eltayeb 1985; UNDP 2007). Since then, it has spread very rapidly, currently
covering 6.5 million hectares across the country, and on a large scale in seven states (Elhadary
2007). These states include El Gedarif, Blue Nile, Kassala, White Nile, Sennar, and Southern
Kordofan (Figure 6.1). The turning point in its expansion was in 1968, when the Mechanized

Red Sea
Northern

Nile

North Darfur
Khartoum Kassala

Al Gezira
North Kordofan
Gedarif
West Darfur

White Nile Sennar

Central Darfur

Blue Nile Legend

South Darfur East Darfur South Kordofan
Mechanized agriculture
Gesarif State
States of Sudan
0 135 270 540 810 1,080
Kilometers

Figure 6.1 Map of Sudan states.

K22928_C006.indd 122 09/07/14 8:38 PM

 Mechanized Rain-Fed Farming and Its Ecological Impact on the Drylands 123

Farming Corporation (MFC) was established by the government on request by the World Bank
(Elhadary 2007).
This expansion, particularly where unplanned, has generated severe environmental and socio-
economic problems. Symptoms and manifestations of the problems include soil deterioration,
declining productivity, removal of trees, land degradation, and destruction of biological habitats.
This chapter aims to describe the ecological consequences of mechanized farming on an arid envi-
ronment, with particular emphasis on Gedarif State in eastern Sudan.
Structurally, this chapter is divided into six sections. The first is about the role of agriculture in
the African economy, including Sudan; the second is about the ecological setup of the drylands and
the geographical aspect of Sudan; the third focuses on the development of mechanized agriculture
in Sudan; the fourth discusses the condition of land tenure in Africa in general and in Sudan in
particular; the ecological impact of mechanized farming is discussed in the fifth section, while the
sixth section is on the socioecological dimension of mechanical agriculture.

6.2 Ecology of Drylands and Sudan

Generally, dryland is defined as an area characterized by the condition of aridity. Although there
is no clear boundary, drylands are considered to be areas where average rainfall is less than the
potential moisture losses through evaporation and transpiration (FAO 2004). According to United
AU: Please provide
Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD 1999), drylands comprise land within the complete details
arid, semiarid, and dry subhumid regions, which are most extensive in Africa (nearly 13 million for “UNCCD
1999” to add to the
km2) and Asia (11 million km2) (White et al. 2002). Ecologically, this region is characterized by reference list.
having an immature ecosystem, aridity, variability, water scarcity, and a very short growing season
that hardly reaches 200 days (Elhadary 2010). The annual rainfall varies over space and time, rang-
ing from <200 to 800 mm annually (FAO 2004) (Table 6.1). Receiving a lower amount of rainfall
over a short period, the world’s drylands are in a need of special type of land use management.
Depending on its ecological characteristics, about six billion hectares, which represents 47% AU: Please provide
of the surface of the earth, can be classified as drylands (UNEP 1992) (Table 6.1). Of this, 3.5 to complete details
for “UNEP 1992”
4.0 billion hectares (57%–65%) are either desertified or prone to desertification. This implies that to add to the refer-
ence list.
almost half of the world’s countries (more than 110) are partially or wholly located in dryland
environments (FAO 2004). These lands are home to nearly 40% of the world’s population (White
et al. 2002), and close to one billion people worldwide depend directly on the drylands for their
livelihoods (Mwangi and Dohrn 2006). In Africa alone, dryland constitutes 43% of the total area, AU: The sentence
beginning “In
40% of the continent’s population, and 59% of all ruminant livestock grazing (Scoones 1994). It Africa alone” has
been changed.
secures a livelihood for more than 50 million pastoralists and up to 200 million agro-pastoralists Please check the
meaning.
(De Jode 2010).
Sudan is located in the eastern part of Africa, between latitudes 8° and 22° north and longitudes
22° and 38° east. The area covered is about 1,882,000 km2, and the country shares borders with
seven countries: Egypt, Libya, Chad, Central Africa Republic, Ethiopia, Eritrea, and Republic of

Table 6.1 Dryland Categories

Classification Rainfall (mm) Area (%) Area (×109 ha)
Hyperarid <200 7.50 1.00
Arid <200 (winter) or <400 (summer) 12.1 1.62
Semiarid 200–500 (winter) or 400–600 (summer) 17.7 2.37
Dry subhumid 500–700 (winter) or 600–800 (summer) 9.90 1.32
Total 47.2 6.31
Source: FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization), Carbon Sequestration in Dryland Soils,
FAO, Rome, 2004.

K22928_C006.indd 123 09/07/14 8:38 PM

 124 Agroecology, Ecosystems, and Sustainability

South Sudan. The total population of Sudan is estimated to be 39 million, growing at 2.7%, with
more than 30 million people living in rural areas (The Sudan Central Bureau of Statistics (CBS)
2011). On July 9, 2011, Sudan was split in two, formalizing the new state of South Sudan (USAID
2012).
Ecologically, the annual rainfall ranges between 75 mm in the extreme north and more than
500 mm in the extreme south (Elhadary 2007). Accordingly, four ecological zones can be identified:
desert; semidesert; low-rainfall savannah; and high-rainfall savannah in the flood plain in the south.
The main characteristics of these zones remain the same as described by Harrison and Jackson
(1958). The desert zone, north of latitude 16° north, represents approximately 29% of Sudan’s total
area. The average annual rainfall of the desert zone is <100 mm. The semiarid zone encompasses
about 19.6% of Sudan’s total area and is located between latitudes 14 and 16° north. The annual
rainfall of the semiarid zone ranges between 100 and 300 mm. The low-rainfall savannah is located
between latitudes 10 and 14° north, with annual rainfall 300–500 mm. This zone covers more than
half (51.1%) of Sudan’s total area. The high-rainfall savannah, located south of latitude 10° north,
has an average annual rainfall <500 mm. This zone constitutes only 10.3% of Sudan’s total area. It
has been estimated that the semiarid zone of the Sudan encompasses about 70% of the surface area
of the country, and 70% of the Sudanese population lives in this zone, with herding and farming as
the main sources of livelihood (Elhadary 2007).
Economically, over 80% of Sudan’s employment takes place in agriculture and its related activi-
ties; the majority of the people are farmers and pastoralists living by subsistence farming and live-
stock herding in a nomadic way of life (UNDP 2007; Elhadary 2007). Sudan, with its good natural
resources (large flat areas, fertile soil, availability of water), is considered a suitable country for
securing food, not only for its people but worldwide, particularly for Arab countries. Out of the total
area of Sudan, about 81 million hectares (250 million acres), 86 million acres could easily be culti-
vable, which is more than half the currently cultivated acreage-base of the United States (Abu Raida
2013). Sudan had an estimated gross domestic product (GDP) of US$58 billion in 2008. Agriculture
was responsible for 26% of GDP, and industry and services 34% and 40%, respectively (USAID
2012). While agricultural land continues to be an important resource, oil production is decreasing
since the secession of South Sudan.

6.3 Development of Mechanized Agriculture in Sudan

Mechanized agriculture is defined simply as the use of mechanical technology to increase the
productivity of agriculture, often to achieve results well beyond the capacity of human labor (FAO
2008). In Sudan, tractors and harvesting machines are replacing manual labor, but the technol-
AU: Please provide
ogy is not fully applied in agriculture. This explains why people call mechanical agriculture in
complete details Gedarif semimechanization, as it partly uses machines. According to Eltayeb et al. (1985) and
for “Eltayeb et al.
1985” to add to the Elhadary (2010), mechanized farming in Sudan started in the 1940s on a small scale near Gedarif
reference list. town (Gadmbaliya), and it reached 600 ha in 1945. It was initiated by the British in Gedarif State
of eastern Sudan to meet the demands of food for their army in East Africa (UNDP 2007). Until
independence, 6000 ha of Durra (sorghum), the dominant crop, was cultivated annually, under a
sharecropping arrangement between the government and farmers who had been allocated land in
the project (Eltayeb and Lewandowski 1983).
The general policy of Sudan, after its independence in 1956, is to increase production of cash
crops, whether through irrigation or rain-fed as mechanized farming. This policy is also supported
AU: The sentence
by international organizations such as World Bank in the interest of securing food for the growing
beginning “The population (Elhadary 2007). The bank support for agricultural development during the 1960s and
Bank’s support”
has been changed. early 1970s was mostly for large-scale development schemes, which often involved mechaniza-
Please check the
meaning.
tion of agriculture, irrigation construction, and rehabilitation (Gibbon et al. 1993). Private sectors

K22928_C006.indd 124 09/07/14 8:38 PM

 Mechanized Rain-Fed Farming and Its Ecological Impact on the Drylands 125

and governmental institutions have been encouraged to take up mechanized farming in Gedarif
State (UNDP 2007). It important to note that the turning point in expansion was in 1968, when
the MFC was established by the government on request from the World Bank (Elhadary 2007). In
Sudan, the World Bank sought to introduce modern and off-the-shelf agricultural technologies for
food crops, export commodities, and livestock (Gibbon et al. 1993). As a consequence, mechanized
farming spread very rapidly in Gedarif as well as in other states in the country. These states include
Kassala, Red Sea, Sennar, Blue Nile, White Nile, South Kordofan, and North Kordofan (Figure 6.1).
Although demarcation and allocation of land to private investors are the responsibility of the MFC,
most of the expansion that has taken place in these areas was not authorized by the MFC. Besides
its role in demarcation, the MFC used to play a role in facilitating credit, determining a maximum
lease period of 25 years, and lately ensuring that 10% of land leased should be allocated for tree
planting around the scheme (Elhadary 2007). This 10% shelterbelt aims to enhance soil fertility
and mitigate the impacts of flash floods (UNDP 2007). Technically, the distribution of mechanized
schemes to the investors is based on dividing rectangular areas into plots of 420 ha (later increased
in places to 630 ha), of which half were leased to farmers and the rest left fallow. After four years,
private farmers were to exchange the formerly leased land with adjacent fallow plots to allow the
soil to recover.
No one can deny the role of mechanized farming in developing the country in general, and
particularly in the states where it is located. Taxes, Islamic Zakkat (a proportion of one-tenth of
the cultivated crops paid to the government), involvement of subsectors, and generation of jobs are
some of its contributions to the economy. However, the unplanned expansion of mechanized farm-
ing, coupled with the way in which it has been practiced, has led to negative socioeconomic and
ecological impacts in the country. A foremost and concrete example is the violation of the four-year
fallow period. This has never been followed in practice, and private farmers illegally seized large
areas outside the designated blocks (UNDP 2007). In 1968, more than 750,000 ha were being culti-
vated in the country, of which it was estimated that more than 200,000 ha constituted unauthorized AU: The sentence
beginning
holdings (Omer 2011). Currently, in Gedarif State, for example, the total area under cultivation “Currently” has
been changed.
amounts to 2.6 million hectares, of which unplanned schemes constitute about 33.8% (Elhadary Please check the
2010; UNDP 2007). The same situation is found in other states; for example, in South Kordofan meaning. AU: Please provide
State (Habila region), some 45% of mechanized farms in 1985 were unsanctioned (UNDP 2002). complete details
Also in Sennar State, 60% of the two million hectares under rain-fed agriculture are occupied by for “UNDP 2002”
to add to the refer-
nonauthorized mechanized schemes, while 30% are under planned mechanization and 10% under ence list.
traditional agriculture. This unorganized expansion into land belonging to other land users has led AU: Please provide
to severe environmental degradation and has become one of the major sources of bloody conflict complete details
for “Elhadary
in the country, as in the case of Darfur (Leroy 2009), in Gedarif (Elhadary 2012), and in Dali and 2012” to add to the
Mazmum (UNDP 2007). reference list.

The MFC, in one way or another, is held responsible for the expansion of unauthorized schemes, AU: Please clarify
the meaning of “a
as it renews contracts for both authorized and unauthorized schemes (Elhadary 2007; Manger 2009). harder institution”.
This led Manger (2009) to describe the MFC as a harder institution, using the laws and the system
to establish enterprises that benefited the supporters of the state. Several authors have reached the
same conclusion, accusing the MFC of allocating large mechanized farming schemes to investors, AU: Please note
merchants, or people affiliated to or close to the government (Egemi 2006a; Elhadary 2010; Komey that Egemi 2006
has been changed
2009). In Gedarif, for example, 64% of leaseholders of mechanized schemes are considered to be to 2006a to match
outsiders, and, astonishingly enough, most of them are traders (31%) or retired government offi- with reference list.
cials, including civil servants and army and police officers (48%), with no agricultural background
(Ijami 2006). Land grabbing by officials affiliated to the state, the military, private investors, land
speculators, religious groups, and urban residents is increasing in Sudan (Pantuliano 2007, 2010). AU: Should Assal
This means that merchants (outsiders), including the Mafia (Assal 2005 in Miller 2005), are the be listed as a sepa-
rate reference?
beneficiaries of agricultural “development,” a number of them having joined the current regime to
maintain their position and privilege. Although it was stated that no farmer should be allowed to

K22928_C006.indd 125 09/07/14 8:38 PM

 126 Agroecology, Ecosystems, and Sustainability

“own” more than one scheme (4.2 km2) as a maximum, the reality showed that one third (32%) have
more than 10 schemes, and in some cases the number reaches 30 schemes each (Elhadary 2010).
At a time when land available for traditional producers is reduced or, at best, remains the same, the
area under unplanned mechanized farming is increasing very rapidly. This phenomenon is not only
confined to Gedarif State; similar cases of acquisition have occurred in other states. According to
Manger (2009), in 1997 the grazing area of the Jawamaa and Bidariya tribe in Northern Kordofan
state was given to a private company called the Malaysian–African Agriculture Company. While
the traditional leadership was not consulted, there were rumors that some village sheikhs of settled
farming groups had not objected to the concession, because the company had bribed them.
AU: The sentence
beginning “The
The seizing of land for mechanized farming has been facilitated by the fragile land tenure situ-
seizing” has been ation in the country. Several authors have declared that grabbing of traditional land will continue if
changed. Please
check the meaning. no serious action is taken to address the issue of land tenure in the country. Under the guise of com-
pulsory acquisition in the public interest with the rhetoric of providing national development, some
agents of the state grab land from ordinary people and, in turn, give land to powerful interest groups
such as investors, the rich, and cronies of governments (Elhadary and Obeng-Odoom 2013). More
detail on the land tenure system and its role in land grabbing and expanding unplanned mechanized
farming is given in the following section.

6.4 Fragility of Land Tenure Situation in Sudan

Despite the effort made by many African governments, including Sudan, to introduce a modern
land tenure system, the customary system is still valid, particularly in most African rural areas. For
decades, African countries have sought to replace “customary” land tenure systems with a “mod-
ern” system of property rights, based on state legislation, on European concepts of ownership, and
on land titling and registration (Cotula 2006). According to their opinion, customary land tenure
was held not to provide adequate security of tenure, thereby discouraging investment and negatively
affecting agricultural productivity (Wilson 1971). Critics claim to have shown that the process is
AU: The sentence mainly designed to benefit transnational corporations (TNCs) that “grab” land from local people,
beginning “In
addition to this”
convert it from farmland, and turn it into investment land (Elhadary and Obeng-Odoom 2013). In
has been changed. addition to this, two other reasons might be that the state was not serious about registering com-
Please check
meaning. munal land, especially that located in remote areas, because it was of no use at the time, or that the
state did so intentionally, aiming to reserve it for use when needed (Elhadary 2010). It is important
to note that the full conversion of communal ownership into an official system is not an easy task,
and is always surrounded by several constraints These constraints include lack of legal awareness;
complicated and lengthy land registration procedures; lack of adequate information; lack of finan-
cial resources and of institutional capacity in government agencies; and the difficulty of obtaining
exclusive property rights in situations involving complex land use arrangements (Elhadary et al.
AU: Please note AU: Please check
that Elhadary 2011 2011). These constraints have limited the outreach of state interventions, and, in Sudan, both sys- that the close
has been changed
to Elhadary et al. tems of tenure are still in operation (Cotula 2006). As a result, very little rural land has been regis- parens after ‘...of
the land’ has been
2011 to match with tered (across the continent formal tenure covers only between 2% and 10% of the land) (Deininger inserted in the cor-
reference list here rect location.
and elsewhere. 2003), and customary land tenure systems continue to be applied in much of rural Africa. Almost AU: Please provide
80% of the land in Sudan is held customarily (Babiker 2008). complete details
for “Babiker 2008”
Prior to the 1970s, most of the land in Sudan was accessed and “owned” through the communal to add to the refer-
system (unregistered) (Elhadary 2007), a system which has proven to be more effective, especially ence list.
in rural areas (FAO 2008). This system offers the tribal leaders the power to manage and distribute
land resources orally (with no written documents) over all members of their villages (Elhadary et al.
2011). This situation remained without noticeable change even after Sudan’s independence in 1956.
The turning point was in 1970, with a number of ill-planned initiatives, the consequences of which
are still felt today (FAO 2008); among these was the Unregistered Lands Act of 1971.

K22928_C006.indd 126 09/07/14 8:38 PM

 Mechanized Rain-Fed Farming and Its Ecological Impact on the Drylands 127

The act of 1971 decreed that all unregistered land throughout the country, occupied or unoc-
cupied, which was not registered before the commencement of this act, should be registered as
government property, and granted the government the legality of disposing of lands as it saw fit AU: Please note
(Elhadary 2007; FAO 2008). Not only that, as stated by Egemi (2006b) and Ayoub (2006), the act that Egemi 2006
entitled the government to use force in safeguarding “its land,” and this has been further strength- has been changed
to 2006b to match
ened by the 1991–1993 amendment of the 1984 Civil Transactions Act, which states that no court with reference list.
of law is competent to receive a complaint that goes against the interest of the state. The imposition
of the 1971 act was followed by the abolition of the native administration system, a local body that
was responsible for organizing access to and use of land in many rural areas. This action was taken
by the government to ensure the suppression of communities or individuals that might resist the
process of land grabbing and to disable their efforts (Komey 2009). As a result, tribal leaders have
lost their historical position and lack the ability to regulate land use and manage inevitable land-
related conflicts.
According to Cotula (2006), the central role of the state in land relations in most African coun-
tries was to promote agricultural development, on the one hand, and to control a valuable asset and
a source of political power, on the other. In Sudan, for example, the act of 1971 was passed by the
Nimeiri government (1969–1985) under pressure from the World Bank to serve the purposes of its
ambitious plan to make Sudan “the bread basket of the Arab world” (Elhadary et al. 2011; Elhadary
and Samat 2012). For this reason, large-scale investments in both irrigated and mechanized rain-fed
agriculture have been adopted in many states of Sudan (Elhadary 2007). As a result, large produc-
tive areas in rural lands have been taken and vested to investors, merchants, or people affiliated or
close to the government, with no compensation or commitment to the communal right. There are
many cases in which no compensation is paid to individuals, families, and communities whose
land is taken. The reason is usually that the customary ownership of local land occupants is not
legally recognized (Anseeuw et al. 2012). In this way, land as a source of wealth and power remains
one of the main differentiating factors between the central and peripheral regions of postcolonial
Sudan (Komey 2009). Grabbing land for public and private use under the deceiving pretext of “new
development” has completely undermined the rights of rural people and had a negative effect on
their livelihood. The rural poor are frequently being dispossessed of land and water resources under
customary tenure (Anseeuw et al. 2012). The International Land Coalition estimates that about 83
million hectares of rural land have been taken over by investors in large-scale agriculture. There
is evidence that the true owners of these land parcels have been neglected and unlawfully evicted
(Molen 2013).
The vulnerability in land tenure is considered as one of the major root causes of many armed
conflicts, social disputes, and land degradation in Sudan (Elhadary 2010; Sulieman 2013). This
explains clearly why all the peace agreements that have taken place in Sudan (Comprehensive Peace
Agreement [CPA] 2005, Darfur Peace Agreement [DPA] 2006, East Peace Agreement [EPA] 2006)
have tried to bring to light the issue of land tenure (Elhadary 2010). For example, the CPA calls
for the incorporation of customary laws and the establishment of Land Commissions to arbitrate
claims, offer compensation, and recommend land reform policies. To date no proper action has AU: The sentence
beginning “To
been taken to address the land tenure; the agreements addressed several issues, such as the right to date” has been
changed. Please
self-determination of the peoples of South Sudan, power sharing, oil and non-oil wealth sharing, check the meaning.
democracy, and permanent ceasefire and security management, but left the vexed land question
to be resolved at a later date (Shanmugaratnam 2008), as if wanting both to benefit from the cur-
rent situation and to take land whenever there is a need (oil extraction, mechanized, or irrigated
schemes) despite the existence of agreements. In this regard, Komey (2009) states that, despite the
fact that the CPA provides some mechanisms for settling land-related issues in the postconflict era,
the current difficulties facing the implementation of the agreement raised great fear among the local
Nuba peoples as to whether their customarily owned land is going to be safeguarded by the agree-
ment or is going to experience further grabbing. This inquiry has been answered by Anseeuw et al.

K22928_C006.indd 127 09/07/14 8:38 PM

 128 Agroecology, Ecosystems, and Sustainability

(2012), who state that, without transparency, accountability, and open debate, decision making over
AU: The sentence
land will continue to be swayed by vested interests at the expense of rural land users.
beginning “From From what has been said, this study affirms that vulnerability of land tenure has led to, among
what has been
said” has been other things, lack of access to credit, particularly to traditional farmers; environmental degrada-
changed. Please
check the meaning.
tion, fueling tension between land users, as in Darfur; and an open door to unplanned expansion of
mechanized agriculture. In turn, the unauthorized expansion has had a remarkable negative impact
on the socioecological condition of the country. More details are given in the following section.

6.5 Impact of Semimechanized Farming on

Environment and Development

Land taken by mechanized farming was not vacant; rather, it supported either pastoralism,
traditional rain-fed agriculture, or wild habitats, principally open woodlands and treed plains (FAO
2008). Thus, unplanned mechanized farming has deprived many traditional land users from access-
ing their rights and uses, leading to severe socioecological constraints and, in some cases, blood-
shed and conflict. Large areas under capital-intensive land use, such as the mechanized farming
schemes in eastern Sudan, have been severely degraded (FAO 2004). Symptoms and manifestations
AU: Would you
like to change ‘fol- of degradation include the clearance of forests, depletion of palatable vegetation species, soil dete-
lowing section’ to
‘following subsec-
rioration, land degradation (desertification), and a collapse in production yield. More details on this
tions’ or specific are given in the following section.
section numbers?

6.5.1 Clearance of Forest

According to Nori (2013), forests in Sudan occupy an area of about 69,949,000 ha, representing
about 29.4% of the country’s area (including the forested area in South Sudan). Of this area, 20% is
classified as primary forest, 71% as naturally regenerated forest, and only 9% as planted forest (FAO
2010). Following the split, the Republic of Sudan has, according to FAO’s classification, become
a low-forest cover country, with about 11% of its total surface area under forest cover. Yet, the
high dependency on forest products and service remains as it was before separation (Gaffar 2011).
Forestry elsewhere, despite its role in sustaining the environment, plays a vital role in producing
fuel, wood, charcoal, and building materials. Moreover, especially in Sudan, forest is considered
as one of the main sources of gum arabic from the Acacia Senegal tree, a product that contributes
much to the country’s economy. Sudan is the world’s largest producer of gum arabic (Abu Raida
2013), which is a source of livelihood for a number of people, particularly in the rural and remote
areas of Sudan (Sulieman 2013).
Presently, the forest is being degraded very rapidly, exceeding the average national clearance
rate, and the country has gained the reputation of the highest deforestation rate in Africa (FAO
2003). It has been estimated that in 1970 the country’s forests and woodlands totaled approximately
915,000 km2, or 38.5% of the land area; by 2010, this had decreased to 69,949,000 ha, constitut-
ing 28% of the country’s land area of 250,581,000 ha (FAO 2008). This implies that Sudan lost
AU: Please provide
6,432,000 ha between 1990 and 2010, and an average of 643,000 ha annually (see Table 6.2 for more
complete details details). This is in line with UNEP (2007) indicating that between 1990 and 2005 the country lost
for “UNEP 2007”
to add to the refer- 11.6% of its forest cover.
ence list. The degradation of forest cover has occurred in several states in the country, but at a particu-
AU: Please provide
complete details
larly high rate in the Gedarif of the eastern Sudan, a region that witnessed the birth of mecha-
for “Sulieman and nized farming. According to Sulieman and Abdel Ghaffar (2013), the area of natural vegetation in
Abdel Ghaffar
2013” to add to the eastern Sudan was reduced from 26.1% in 1979 to 12.6% in 1999, and further to 9.4% in 2007. In
reference list here
and elsewhere.
Gedarif State, for example, the forest area has been degraded from 32% in 1985 to only 15% in 2007
(Elhadary 2007). This is in line with Sulieman (2010), who states that the average natural vegetation

K22928_C006.indd 128 09/07/14 8:38 PM

 Mechanized Rain-Fed Farming and Its Ecological Impact on the Drylands 129

Table 6.2 Area of Forest and Other Wooded Land in Sudan AU: Please check
change to 2000.
(North and South) in 2010 Area
Type 1990 2000 2005 2010
Forest 76,381 124,644 67,546 69,949
Other wooded land 58,082 54,153 52,188 50,224
Total land area 237,600 237,600 237,600 237,600
Inland water bodies 12,981 12,981 12,981 12,981
Total area of country 250,581 250,581 250,581 250,581
Source: FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization), Global Forest
Assessment—Sudan, FAO, Rome, 2010.
Note: Values are x1000 ha.

clearing rate in Gedarif was around 0.8% per year, and the most rapid clearing occurred during the
1970s, when the conversion rate to mechanized agriculture increased to about 4.5% per year.
Several factors have been implicated in the reduction of forest area in the country, among
which several authors blamed the unplanned expansion of mechanized farming (Elhadary 2007;
Sulieman 2013; USAID 2012). According to USAID (2012), forest ecosystems throughout Sudan
have been degraded due to drought, fire, uncontrolled grazing, overcutting, and encroachment by
agriculture. Arfat (2012) states that the change in forested land is mainly related to small-scale
shifting agriculture or land clearing by landlords who want to expand agricultural land. This study
is in line with Sulieman and Elagib (2012) and Sulieman (2013), who affirm that the establishment
of large-scale mechanized farming has taken place on land that previously used to be covered
with natural vegetation (forest and pasture). Mechanized farming has not only invaded forest and
rangeland areas but also encroached on legally protected areas like Dinder National Park in Sudan
(FAO 2008).
The taking of forestland is not confined to Africa; some Asian countries have witnessed the
same grabbing of customary land, but the rate of grabbing is highest in Africa. Millions of hectares
of customary forestland are being taken to produce oil palm in Indonesia and parts of Malaysia
(Colchester 2011). There is dispute about the accuracy of existing figures on the extent of land
taken. It has been reported that total land acquisitions worldwide have reached 134 million hectares
(Anseeuw et al. 2012). Approximately 67 million hectares of this are located in Africa, with 43 mil-
lion hectares reported for Asia, 19 million hectares in Latin America, and 5.4 million in Eastern
Europe and Oceania. The high levels of interest in acquiring land in Africa, as well as in Sudan,
appear to be driven by a perception that large tracts of land can be acquired from governments with
little or no payment (Anseeuw et al. 2012). Land grabbing in Sudan is not a twenty-first-century
phenomenon; it goes back to the nineteenth century, it is still going on today, and there are signs that
it will continue in the future (Babiker 2011).
Besides the destruction and reduction of forest area, mechanized farming is indirectly respon-
sible for destroying the environment. This is because it generates difficulties for pastoralists in
passing along their traditional animal routes, thus forcing them to concentrate in small areas for
a longer time or to invade forest land (Elhadary 2007). In Gedarif State, for example, pastoralists
have to wait until farmers have harvested their crops, leaving them no option but to bring their live-
stock into the forest for survival, thus causing serious degradation. This clearly explains the severe
degradation of El Rawashda forest in the eastern Sudan, which is the inevitable public grazing
for pastoralists during rainy seasons (Elhadary 2007, 2010). Moreover, the use of unsound tillage
practices (Eltayeb 1985; Eltayeb and Lewandowski 1983; Sulieman 2013) and cultivating the same
monocrops continuously without a fallow period has led to a massive change in the structure of
natural vegetation. Some trees and grasses have disappeared, such as Belepheris edulis Siha, and
some trees that are harmful to the environment have invaded the area, such as Prosopis glandulosa
(mesquite) and Striga hermonthica Boda (Elhadary 2007).

K22928_C006.indd 129 09/07/14 8:38 PM

 130 Agroecology, Ecosystems, and Sustainability

Several strategies have been adopted for renewable natural vegetation in the country. Among
these is the requirement to plant a 10% shelterbelt around each mechanized scheme. Inclusion of
shelterbelts in the mechanized farming system started in 1994 (Glover 2005). This implies that, of
every 420 ha, 10% (42 ha) was expected to be planted with trees. However, these measures, although
AU: The sentence
beginning insufficient to bring back the degraded forest, have not yet been fully enforced, and the application
“Reasons for this
failure” has been
was by and large ignored (FAO 2008). Reasons for this failure include lack of incentive and (at the
changed. Please same time) controversy over rights; farmers believe that trees around the scheme are their “own”
check the meaning.
private property, while in theory they belong to the government, as the Forests National Corporation
(FNC) provided the seeds and technical support (Glover 2005). Moreover, farmers prefer not to
have trees on their farms, as trees attract birds and insects and become obstacles to using machines
for cultivation (Elhadary 2007). Deforestation, especially in a fragile ecosystem, has become a
serious environmental problem in Sudan. The removal of trees for mechanized farming has had
a remarkable negative impact on other natural resources, such as the fertility of the soil and the
condition of biodiversity. Soil erosion, loss of soil fertility, and salinization are some of the main
consequences of deforestation (Cacho 2001).

6.5.2 Soil Depletion and Collapse of Yield Production

Expansion of mechanized cultivation at the expense of forest area is one of the major forces
driving land cover change, not only in Sudan but in the whole Sudano-Sahelian zone of Africa
(Babiker 2011). This, coupled with the practice of mechanized agriculture, has increased the rate
of soil deterioration, leading to a sharp decrease in crop production. According to Ayoub (1998),
about 64 million hectares of soil is degraded in Sudan. Several authors have concluded that soil,
mainly in mechanized areas, has been seriously degraded and has lost its fertility (Ayoub 1998;
Elhadary 2007; FAO 2008). According to Ayoub (1998), 81% of the total area of degraded soil is in
the susceptible drylands (arid, semiarid, and dry subhumid). Most of the degradation (74% of the
total degraded soils) is in the arid and semiarid zones, but significant percentages of land are also
degraded in the dry subhumid and moist subhumid zones.
In Gedarif, for example, the massive expansion of rain-fed cultivation increases the exposure of
soil surfaces to wind and water erosion, leading to more land degradation (Elhadary 2007). Sulieman
and Abdel Ghaffar (2013) affirm that mechanized farming and overgrazing are the major factors
behind the increase of bare land in the Butana of Northern Gedarif. For them, mechanical working
of the shallow soils, using tractors and wide-level discs, has led to mechanical soil damage, and, in
many cultivated areas, gravels appeared on the top soil due to fluctuation of rain. The same conclu-
sion has also been reached by Biro et al. (2013), who state that the chemical and physical properties
of soil have deteriorated due to the changes in land use and land cover, mainly by the expansion of
mechanized rain-fed agriculture. In the same line, Sulieman (2013) states that, by stripping away the
vegetation cover with mechanized cultivation, the soil is laid bare to be carried away by water and
wind erosion. The deterioration of soil fertility has been aggravated by the fact that farmers did not
use fertilizers or organize crop rotation or fallow systems (FAO 2008). Cropping without appropri-
ate nutrient inputs has degraded about 12 Mha, particularly in small-scale farming on sandy and
AU: Please note
that Ayoup 2998 loamy soils. When these processes of resource mismanagement coincided with the recent recurrent
has been changed
to Ayoub 1998 to
droughts, collapse of the economic base of fragile areas took place (Ayoub 1998).
match with refer- The inevitable consequences of soil degradation in Sudan and elsewhere in Africa have been
ence list.
the appearance of some parasitic grasses such as S. hermonthica (Boda) and a dramatic decline in
AU: Please verify
crop production (Elhadary 2007). Joel et al. (1995) reported that the Striga problem in Africa is location of inserted
intimately associated with intensification of land use. This is in line with Glover (2005), who stated closing
mark.
quotation

that “Striga in Gedarif appears to thrive best on heavily used soils of less fertility; hence reduces
crop productivity.” This implies clearly that there is a clear link between deterioration of soil fertil-
ity and the reduction of crop production. Therefore, decline in yields of a crop may be an indicator

K22928_C006.indd 130 09/07/14 8:38 PM

 Mechanized Rain-Fed Farming and Its Ecological Impact on the Drylands 131

that soil quality has changed, which in turn may indicate that soil and land degradation are also
occurring (Stocking and Murnaghan 2000). This explains why Africa is the only region in the
world where agricultural productivity is largely stagnant. Yields of maize and other staple cereals
typically remain at about 1 tonne per hectare (1000 kg/ha), which is about one-third of the average
achieved in Asia and Latin America (FAO 2008).
As in other African countries, in Sudan crop production is decreasing, and the country has not
only lost its status as a breadbasket of the Arab world but has even failed to secure food for its entire
population. This is due to large-scale degradation of its rich soil as well as other natural resources,
mainly through unsuccessful land use policies and practices (Elhadary 2007, 2010). Glover (2005)
affirmed that, since the advent of mechanization, sorghum yields per hectare have been constantly
decreasing. In the eastern Sudan crop yields in the past, under the traditional system, were esti-
mated at 10–20 bags of sorghum per hectare (900–1800 kg/ha) and about 750 kg/ha of sesame
in the early 1960s. In the 1986/1987 season the sorghum yields had dropped to an average of 4–6
bags/ha (360–540 kg/ha) (Eltayeb 1985). This can be compared with yields from mechanized farm-
ing which range from 190 to 980 kg/ha for sorghum and 80–600 kg/ha for sesame (Eltayeb 1985).
In Gedarif State, while the area under cultivation is increasing, the production per feddan (equal to
AU: Please define
0.42 ha) decreased sharply from four sacks of sorghum in 1980 to 1.1 in 2005 and for sesame from “gonttar”.
3.4 gonttar/feddan in 1980 to 1.5 in 2005.
This section argues that the role of the land tenure situation in soil deterioration should not be
ignored. The vulnerability of the land tenure situation led farmers, “owners” or renters, to care
about high profit in a short period rather than considering the sustainability of land use, as they lack
confidence about having the scheme for the coming years. Without long-term ownership, farmers
have little incentive for investment in and protection of natural resources (FAO 2008; Elhadary AU: The sentence
beginning “This
2010). This explains why farmers always care about horizontal expansion rather than vertical expan- explains” has been
changed. Please
sion to maintain their output. check the meaning.

6.5.3 Notion of Desertification in Sudan

The phenomena of desertification affects arid lands all over the world, but tends to be concen-
trated in Asia and Africa, each of which accounts for 37% of all desertified land (Grainger 1990).
The repeated removal of natural vegetation and continuous deterioration in soil fertility are the
major factors and, at the same time, indicators of desertification. FAO (2001) reported that, overall, AU: The sentence
approximately four million hectares of African forests are cleared each year, to the extent that 45% beginning
“Shifting cultiva-
of Africa’s original forest cover has disappeared. Shifting cultivation accounts for 70% of the clear- tion” has been
ing of closed canopy forests and 60% of the cutting of savanna forests, thereby rendering the land changed. Please
check the meaning.
vulnerable to desertification/land degradation.
In the case of Sudan, desertification has to do with the deterioration in soil fertility rather than
removal of forest. According to Glover (2005), the desertification in the Sudan is more linked to soil
degradation than to vegetation degradation. Symptoms of desertification, such as soil degradation,
massive runoff, bare land, and reduction in crop production, have been observed in many parts of
Sudan. Recently, some signs of desertification on a lower scale have prevailed in states like Gedarif
(Elhadary 2007), Kassala, and North Kordofan State (FAO 2008). This is due, among other things,
to rapid expansion of mechanized cultivation (Elhadary 2007), the nation’s quest for fuel wood
(Ayoub 1998), and repeated cultivation with the same crops. However, large-scale mechanized
farming has been the main factor contributing to deforestation and consequent land degradation
(FAO 2001).
If no serious action is taken to mitigate desertification, a large productive area will be lost,
especially in the reality of global warming. According to UNDP (2007), between the mid-1970s
and late 2000s, summer rainfall decreased by 15%–20% across parts of Sudan, placing already
food-insecure populations at greater risk. Due to climatic changes, crop yields, mainly in Africa,

K22928_C006.indd 131 09/07/14 8:38 PM

 132 Agroecology, Ecosystems, and Sustainability

AU: Please provide

complete details
may fall by 10%–20% in 2050 (Jones and Thornton 2003). A climate sensitivity analysis of agri-
for “Jones and culture concluded that some African countries would virtually lose their entire rain-fed agriculture
Thornton 2003” AU: Please provide
to add to the refer- by 2100 (Mendelsohn et al. 2000). The consequences of desertification are worse, and even beyond complete details
ence list. human imagination, as they negatively affect all aspects of the socioeconomic and political life of for “Mendelsohn et
al. 2000” to add to
the country. In Sudan, desertification is clearly linked to conflict, as there are strong indications that the reference list.

the hardship caused to pastoralist societies by desertification is one of the underlying causes of the
current war in Darfur (UNDP 2007).

6.6 Discussion: Mechanization and its Socioecological Impact

Agriculture, including mechanized farming, plays a crucial role in shaping the economy of
most African countries, securing food and generating jobs for the overwhelmingly rural population.
Fifty-eight percent of the active workforce in Africa is employed in agriculture, while 83% of the
population depend on farming for their livelihood (FAO 2008). The Sudanese economy is predomi-
nantly agricultural (including crop and livestock production, forestry, wildlife, and fisheries, which
altogether contribute an average 44.4% of GDP). The agricultural sector contributes more than 85%
of Sudan’s export earnings and about 90% of the national food requirements. It accommodates more
than 80% of the population (Abu Raida 2013). Moreover, in the1980s one–two million laborers
moved to the mechanized farming areas, where they could find three or four months’ work at weed-
ing and harvest time (UNDP 2007). This situation is no longer sustainable, and the past contribution
of agriculture to socioeconomic life ought to be revised. Currently, most land under agricultural
mechanization has experienced severe degradation, as highlighted in the previous sections, and
agriculture has failed to meet its socioeconomic objectives. In turn, it has become a major factor
fuelling land use conflict, especially in a country like Sudan with multiple ethnicities, religions, and
races. Two scenarios have been highlighted to evaluate and measure the current situation of mecha-
nized farming. These are the total number of farmers and the farmers–herders relation. The number
AU: Please provide
of farmers and agricultural laborers involved in mechanized farming is decreasing very sharply.
complete details Only about 9800 farmers “owned” mechanized schemes in Gedarif in 2007, compared with the
for “CBS 2010” to
add to the refer- total population of 1,336,662 persons (CBS 2010). This implies that only 5% of the total population AU: The sentence
ence list. are benefiting directly from mechanized farming. This, together with the introduction of machines beginning “Today”
has been changed.
in cultivation, has thrown light on the plight of the seasonal workers. Today, most of the big farmers Please check the
meaning.
depend on caretakers (Wakeel) to follow cultivation processes; thus, their role is reduced to funding
and remote supervision (Elhadary 2007). Regarding employment, a mechanized scheme of 4200 ha
needs only five people as permanent workers and around 35 persons for the process of weeding and
harvesting. This figure implies that only a few people depend on mechanized farming for a secure
livelihood, and rejects the notion that agriculture employs 80% of the labor force in the country.
According to the UNDP (2007), in Sudan 70% depends on traditional rain-fed farming, 12% on
irrigated agriculture, and only 0.7% on mechanized agriculture.
Although most of the unplanned mechanized farming expansion has taken place in areas that
have traditionally belonged to the local communities, they have not gained much from the utiliza-
tion of their lands. In southern Gedarif, for example, 84,000 ha have been taken from traditional
producers and demarcated for only 200 investors, leaving around 3750 families landless, as only
7%, around 5880 ha, was given to 350 local families (Ijami 2006). Furthermore, mechanized farm-
ing is still today creeping into pastoral routes; in Gedarif State, six out of eight traditional pastoral
routes have been closed, and their boundaries are not clear due to unorganized expansion (Elhadary
2010; Sulieman 2013). However, the most dangerous environmental impact is that agriculture is
now moving into more ecologically marginal areas in the northern Gedarif, exceeding the grazing
line: a line that separates agriculture from rangeland areas, as the northern part (arid and semiarid
land) of Gedarif is reserved for grazing, while agriculture is allowed in the southern part (humid).

K22928_C006.indd 132 09/07/14 8:38 PM

 Mechanized Rain-Fed Farming and Its Ecological Impact on the Drylands 133

Elhadary (2007) collected evidence that mechanized farming is moving behind the grazing line and
has invaded most of the northern area. Astonishingly, nobody is held responsible for this shift, but
some rumors have blamed lobbying by big farmers in Gedarif (Elhadary 2010). This illegal push of
mechanized agriculture into more ecologically fragile areas means two things: that environmental
laws tend to be violated by mechanized famers, and that there is no land left in the south for further
horizontal expansion (Sulieman and Abdel Ghaffar 2013).
Under the pretext of “development,” communal lands have been taken and vested to outside
investors, without taking into account the historical right of local communities and the nature of
drylands. Unequal access to land remains one of the fundamental causes that contribute to the
grievance and protracted conflict in most African countries (Elhadary and Samat 2011). It has been AU: Please
check whether
revealed that the reallocation of the grabbed communal land to outsiders remains one of the essen- this should be
“Elhadary and
tial factors behind livelihood insecurity, grievance and conflict, marginalization, and spread of pov- Samat (2011a
erty among rural communities. This explains clearly why most pastoral areas, especially in Africa, or b)”.
have recently witnessed severe conflicts and bloodshed. In Sudan, for example, without ignoring
the role of ethnicity and environmental problems in escalating the tension, the ongoing conflicts in
several parts of the country are political in nature and related in way or another to land rights. This
idea is supported by Ayoub (2006), who states that Sudan’s conflicts have many causes, but at the
root of each conflict are questions over the control and distribution of resources. The most important
resource is land: whether used for agriculture, cattle herding, or subterranean resources such as oil
or water, land ownership is the key to wealth and power. According to USAID (2012), environmen-
tal degradation and competition for limited natural resources has been a contributing cause to con-
flict in the region. Thus, the unorganized expansion of mechanized farming is considered one of the
fundamental reasons why the country has earned the reputation as a home of bloody civil wars, and
the country is unlikely to see lasting peace until such issues have been addressed (Sulieman 2013).
In view of these challenges, this chapter has pointed out clearly that all the three peace agreements
that have taken place in Sudan do not address the issue of communal land right effectively enough.
In addition, the law of access to land is still vague and unclear.
It is worth nothing that Sudan has a federal Ministry of Agriculture and a Ministry of Agriculture
in each state. These ministries lack technical and financial capacity (UNDP 2007), and they are
doing politics rather than fulfilling their objective of formulating policies and developing sustain-
able agriculture. This explains why most of the agricultural ministries are affiliated to the current
regime and do not even have a background in agriculture; the current minister is a medical profes-
sional. Furthermore, the linkages between the agricultural ministry and relevant ministries such
as the forest, livestock, and environment ministries are weak. These institutional constraints have
led to unsound agricultural policy, which has often ignored the nature of drylands and the need for
small-scale farmers. The primary focus is on ways of supporting big farmers to obtain loans and
machines, while small farmers are completely neglected or left to struggle till they are fed up and
give up farming.
Given the nature of drylands, agriculture is not always the best practice in such marginal areas.
Other land uses might be more profitable and suitable to the environment. In this regard, White et
al. (2002) mentioned that many people have a “tradition” in agriculture that is not always matched
by a similar attitude toward other land uses such as forestry, wildlife ranching, or ecotourism, all
of which have become profitable enterprises in many dryland regions of the world. The failure to
address the needs of the local people and the creation of unprecedented ecological problems are
sufficient justification for calling mechanized agriculture an illusion of development rather than sus-
tainable development (Elhadary 2010). Therefore, supporting and encouraging small-scale farming
is best suited to the situation of drylands. According to Pearce (2012) cited in Obeng-Odoom (2013),
smallholder farmers in either the urban or rural setting in Africa and Asia, and indeed elsewhere,
are the answer to the ecological crises in the agrarian sector. Further, he offers evidence on how
small-scale farming has led to increased income for farmers and an increase in food production.

K22928_C006.indd 133 09/07/14 8:38 PM

 134 Agroecology, Ecosystems, and Sustainability

In urban areas, Pearce shows how the use of urban agriculture can create greater interaction between
the city, the periurban area, and the countryside.

6.7 Conclusions

This chapter is about the ecological impact of mechanized farming on the drylands of eastern
Sudan. The analysis has shown that unplanned mechanized agriculture has expanded very rapidly
at the expense of traditional farming, forest, and rangeland. Weak governmental institutions coupled
with the vulnerable system of land tenure have accelerated unauthorized expansion and facilitated
land grabbing in the country. Desertification, deforestation, soil depletion, and reduction in crops
are some of the socioecological consequences of unorganized expansion. In the prevailing climatic
changes, these ecological constraints have become a major threat to agriculture and have become
one of the fundamental factors that fuel conflicts in several parts of Sudan. Addressing the issue
of land tenure, legalizing unplanned mechanized farming, and sustaining agriculture are greatly
needed if food insecurity and internal conflicts are to be avoided in the future. This chapter recom-
mended that, in situations where no productive land is left, vertical expansion is essential in achiev-
ing food security, poverty alleviation, and overall sustainable development. In the fragile ecosystem
of drylands, selection of suitable land use type must be scientifically based, as agriculture is not
always the best choice in such a harsh environment. It is time to expand the agribusiness industry
and consider agriculture as a coequal partner with industry, rejecting the old views that saw agricul-
ture as a passive agent in socioeconomic development.

6.8 Summary

The Sudanese economy is predominantly agricultural; the sector contributes close to 44.4% of
GDP. Fifty-eight percent of the active workforce is employed in agriculture, while 83% of the popu-
lation depend on farming for securing their livelihood. Mechanized or semimechanized rain-fed
farming was initiated in Sudan (Gedarif State) in the 1940s, during British colonization. Since then
it has spread very rapidly all over the country, and currently 6.5 million hectares is under mecha-
nized cultivation. Despite its positive role in the economy, mechanized farming has been presented
as a serious source of environmental problems in the country. To measure the ecological impact of
this sector and trace its development, a literature review has been carried out, and the results are
reviewed in detail. The study argues that mechanized farming is not the primary culprit responsible
for massive land destruction. Rather, unplanned expansion, seeking high profit, and caring less
about sustainability are the essential factors to be blamed. These factors have been exacerbated by
the fragile land tenure system in the country. The study concluded that securing land rights; con-
sidering the ecological nature of drylands in the scheme’s distribution; enforcing all environmental
laws, particularly the shelterbelt of 10% around each scheme; bringing back natural vegetation; and
creating sound cooperation between stakeholders dealing with natural resources (agriculture, forest,
environment) are greatly needed.

AU: Please note

that references
Sulieman and References
Ahmed (2013)
and UNDP
(United Nations Abu Raida, K. M. M. 2013. Prospects for modernization of agriculture in Sudan with an emphasis to food
Development
Programme) (1992)
security. J Agric Sci Rev 2:39–50.
are not cited in Anseeuw, W., L. A. Wily, L. Cotula, and M. Taylor. 2012. Land Rights and the Rush for Land: Findings of the
text. Please insert
cross-references in Global Commercial Pressures on Land Research Project. Rome: International Land Coalition (ILC).
suitable location
or delete from
the list.

K22928_C006.indd 134 09/07/14 8:38 PM

 Mechanized Rain-Fed Farming and Its Ecological Impact on the Drylands 135

Arfat, Y. 2012. Land Use/Land Cover Change Detection and Quantification—A Case Study in Eastern Sudan.
Earth and Ecosystem Sciences. Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Ayoub, M. 1998. Extent, severity and causative factors of land degradation in the Sudan. J Arid Environ
38:397–409.
Ayoub, M. 2006. Land and conflict in Sudan. In M. Simmons and P. Dixon (eds), Peace by Piece Addressing
Sudan’s Conflicts. London: Conciliation Resources. AU: Please provide
Babiker, M. 2011. Mobile pastoralism and land grabbing in Sudan: Impacts and responses. In International conference date
and location for
Conference on Future of Pastoralism. University of Sussex. reference “Babiker
Biro, K., B. Pradhan, M. Buchroithner, and F. Makeschin. 2013. Land use/land cover change analysis and its (2011)”.

impact on soil properties in the Northern part of Gedarif region, Sudan. Land Degrad Dev 24:90–102.
Cacho, O. 2001. An analysis of externalities in agroforestry systems in the presence of land degradation. Ecol
Econ 39:131–143. AU: Please provide
CBS (Central Bureau of Statistics Sudan). 2011. Government of Sudan. complete details
Colchester, M. 2011. Palm oil and indigenous peoples in South East Asia. FPP Contribution to ILC. Collaborative for reference
“Central Bureau
Research Project on Commercial Pressures on Land, Rome. of Statistics Sudan
(2011)”.
Cotula, L. 2006. Changes in “Customary” Land Tenure Systems in Africa. London: International Institute for
Environment and Development (IIED).
Deininger, K. 2003. Land Policies for Growth and Poverty Reduction World Bank Policy Research. New York:
World Bank.
De Jode, H. 2010. Modern and Mobile: The Future of Livestock Production in Africa’s Drylands. London:
International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED) and SOS Sahel International.
Egemi, O. 2006a. Land tenure in Sudan: Challenges to livelihood security and social peace. In G. E. El Tayeb
(ed.), Land Issue and Peace in Sudan, p. 13028. Khartoum: Sudan Environment Conservation Society.
Egemi, O. 2006b. Sudan: Land and peace processes in Sudan. In M. Simmons and P. Dixon (eds), Peace by
Piece Addressing Sudan’s Conflicts, pp. 34–54. London: Conciliation Resources.
Elbashir, A., F. A. Siddig, A. Ijaimi, and H. M. Nour. 2004. Sudan Poverty Reduction and Programs in
Agriculture. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO).
Elhadary, Y. A. E. 2007. Pastoral Adaptation and Socio-Economic Transformations in the Butana Area—Al
Gedarif State, Sudan. Khartoum: University of Khartoum.
Elhadary, Y. A. E. 2010. Challenges facing land tenure system in relation to pastoral livelihood security in
Gedarif State, Eastern Sudan. J Geogr Reg Plann 3:208–218.
Elhadary, Y. A. E. and N. Samat. 2011a. Political economy and urban poverty in the developing countries:
Lessons learned from the Sudanese experience. J Geogr Geol 3:63–76.
Elhadary, Y. A. E. and N. Samat. 2011b. Pastoral land rights and protracted conflict in eastern Sudan. J Pan Afr
Stud 4:74–90.
Elhadary, Y. A. E. and N. Samat. 2012. Political economy and urban poverty in the developing countries:
Lessons learned from Sudan and Malaysia. J Geogr Geol 4:212–223.
Elhadary, Y. A. E., N. Samat, and R. Hasni. 2011. Land use changes and its impact on local communities at
Seberang Perai Tengah of Penang, Malaysia. Issues in peri-urban regions and ways towards sustainable
peri-urban futures. Conference Room, School of Humanities, Penang, Malaysia: Universiti Sains Malaysia.
Elhadary, Y. A. E., N. Samat, and F. Obeng-Odoom. 2013. Development at the peri-urban area and its impact
on agricultural activities: An example from the Seberang Perai Region, Penang State, Malaysia. Agroecol
Sustain Food Syst 37:834–856.
Eltayeb, G. E. 1985. Environmental Management in the Sudan: Gadarif District Study Area. Khartoum:
Institute of Environmental Studies, University of Khartoum.
Eltayeb, G. E. and A. M. Lewandowski. 1983. Environmental monitoring: Environmental degradation in
Gedarif district. In Proceeding of the National Seminar on Indicators of Environmental Changes and
Degradation in Sudan. Khartoum: University of Khartoum.
FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization). 2001. Global forest resources assessment 2000. Forestry Paper.
Rome: FAO.
FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization). 2003. Forest outlook study, sub-regional report, North Africa.
Rome: FAO.
FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization). 2004. Carbon sequestration in dryland soils. Rome: FAO.
FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization). 2008. Agricultural mechanization in Africa. Time for action. Rome:
FAO.

K22928_C006.indd 135 09/07/14 8:38 PM

 136 Agroecology, Ecosystems, and Sustainability

FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization). 2010. Global forest assessment—Sudan. Rome: FAO.
Gaffar, A. 2011. Forest Plantation and Woodlots in Sudan. Nairobi: African Forest Forum.
Gibbon, P., K. J. Havnevik, and K. Hermele. 1993. A Blighted Harvest: The World Bank and African Agriculture
in the 1980s. Trenton: Africa World Press.
Glover, E. K. 2005. Tropical Dryland Rehabilitation: Case Study on Participatory Forest Management in
Gedarif, Sudan. Helsinki: Faculty of Agriculture and Forestry, University of Helsinki.
Grainger, A. 1990. The Threatening Desert: Controlling Desertification. London: Earthscan Publications.
Harrison, N. and J. Jackson. 1958. Ecological Classification of the Sudan. Khartoum: Forest Department,
Ministry of Agriculture.
Ijami, A. 2006. Mechanized farming and conflict in Sudan. In G. E. El Tayeb (ed.), Land Issue and Peace in
Sudan, pp. 25–39. Khartoum: Sudan Environment Conservation Society.
Joel, D. M., J. C. Steffens, and D. E. Matthews. 1995. Germination of weedy root parasites. In J. Kigel and G.
AU: Please provide Galili (eds), Seed Development and Germination, pp. 567–597. New York: Marcel Dekker.
publication details Komey, G. K. 2009. Communal land rights, identities and conflicts in Sudan: The nuba question. The human
for Komey 2009.
rights dimensions of land in the Middle East and North Africa, Cairo, Egypt.
Leroy, M. 2009. Environment and Conflict in Africa—Reflections on Darfur. University for Peace, Africa
Programme, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Manger, L. 2009. Resource based conflicts in Western Sudan–Some reflections on the role of the state. In
M. Leroy (ed.), Environment and Conflict in Africa: Reflections on Darfur, pp. 242–252. Addis Ababa:
University of Peace Press.
Miller, C. 2005. Power, land and ethnicity in the Kassala-Gedaref States: An introduction. In C. Miller
AU: Please check (ed.), Land, Ethnicity and Political Legitimacy in Eastern Sudan, pp. 3–58. Cairo: Centre d’Études et
inserted definition de Documentation Économiques, Juridiques et Sociales/Development Studies and Research Centre
of CEDEJ/DSRC.
(CEDEJ/DSRC).
Molen, P. V. D. 2013. How to Stop Land Grabbing in Africa. Lemmer, The Netherlands: Geoinformation
Management GIM, Geomares.
Mustafa, R. H. 2006. Risk Management in the Rain-Fed Sector of Sudan: Case Study, Gedaref Area Eastern
Sudan. Giessen, Germany: Institute of Agricultural and Food System Management, Faculty of Agricultural
Sciences, Home Economics and Environmental Management, Justus Liebig University.
Mwangi, E. and S. Dohrn. 2006. Biting the Bullet: How to Secure Access to Drylands Resources for Multiple
Users? Washington DC: International Food Policy Research Institute.
Nori, W. M. T. 2013. Detection of Land Cover Changes in El Rawashda Forest, Sudan: A Systematic
Comparison. Dresden, Germany: Faculty of Forest, Technical University of Dresden.
Obeng-Odoom, F. 2013. The grab of the world’s land and water resources. Braz J Polit Econ 33:527–537.
Omer, A. M. 2011. Agriculture policy in Sudan. Agric Sci Res J 1:1–29.
Pantuliano, S. 2007. The Land Question: Sudan’s Peace Nemesis. London: Overseas Development Institute.
Pantuliano, S. 2010. Oil, Land and Conflict: The Decline of Misseriyya Pastoralism in Sudan. London: Overseas
Development Institute.
Pearce, F. 2012. The Land Grabbers: The New Fight over Who Owns the Earth. Boston: Beacon Press.
Scoones, I. 1994. Living with Uncertainty: New Directions in Pastoral Development in Africa. London:
Intermediate Technology Publications.
Shanmugaratnam, N. 2008. Post-War development and the land question in South Sudan. In International
Symposium on Resource under Stress. Kyoto, Japan: African Centre for Peace and Development,
Ryukoku University.
Stocking, M. and N. Murnaghan. 2000. Land Degradation Guidelines for Field Assessment. London: Earthscan
Publication Ltd.
Sulieman, H. M. 2013. Land grabbing along livestock migration routes in Gadarif state, Sudan: Impacts on pas-
toralism and the environment. Paper # 19. The Hague: The Land Deal Politics Initiative. The International
Institute of Social Studies, Erasmus University.
Sulieman, H. M. and A. G. M. Ahmed. 2013. Monitoring changes in pastoral resources in eastern Sudan: A
synthesis of remote sensing and local knowledge. Pastor Res Policy Pract 3:1–16.
Sulieman, H. M. and N. A. Elagib. 2012. Implications of climate, land-use and land-cover changes for pastoral-
ism in Eastern Sudan. J Arid Environ 85:132–141.
UNDP (United Nations Development Programme). 1992. World Atlas of Desertification. London: Edward
Arnold.

K22928_C006.indd 136 09/07/14 8:38 PM

 Mechanized Rain-Fed Farming and Its Ecological Impact on the Drylands 137

AU: Please provide UNDP (United Nations Development Programme). 2007. Sudan post-conflict environmental assessment.
publisher name for
reference “UNDP Nairobi, Kenya.
(United Nations USAID (United States Agency for International Development). 2012. Sudan Environmental Threats and
Development
Programme) Opportunities Assessment with Special Focus on Biological Diversity and Tropical Forest. Washington,
(2007)”. DC: Management System International.
White, R. P., D. Tunstall, and N. Henninger. 2002. An Ecosystem Approach to Drylands: Building Support for
New Development Policies. Washington, DC: World Resources Institute.
Wilson, R. J. A. 1971. Land tenure and economic development—A study of the economic consequences of land
registration in Kenya’s smallholder areas. Stat Soc Inquiry Soc Ireland 22:124–151.

K22928_C006.indd 137 09/07/14 8:38 PM

K22928_C006.indd 138 09/07/14 8:38 PM