The World Food Safety Day, celebrated every year on June 7th, reminds us that ensuring universal access to sufficient amounts of safe food is key for sustainable development and wellbeing. Subsistence foodstuff producers, who grow food for their family’s consumption with no or little surplus for sale, account for a significant share of the world’s food production and thus play a crucial role in the efforts to achieve food security.
Most of the world’s farms are smallholdings (84%) of less than two hectares and they contribute more to global food production than farms of any other size. Farms of less than two hectares are responsible for between 28 and 31 per cent of the world’s crop production and between 30 and 34 per cent of the world’s food supply, while they cover around 24 per cent of the world’s harvested area. Smallholdings have greater cropping intensity or higher yields than larger farms because they are the ones allocating the largest share of their crops (between 55 and 59 per cent) to food. Although many smallholdings are market-oriented, many others are devoted to subsistence farming.
The prevalence of subsistence agriculture is often associated with a low level of development and a high poverty rate. Although small subsistence farms can achieve good yields, they tend to rely on traditional labour-intensive techniques, which manifests in reduced labour productivity. Subsistence agriculture is also typically linked with limited capital resources, reduced value added, constraints to organization, voice and representation, and a strong vulnerability to climate risks and pests. In this sense, improving access to markets and credit of subsistence farmers is often seen as a driver of sustainable development, but designing effective policies and conducting impactful research in this regard requires solid, timely, and reliable statistics on subsistence farmers and their production.
Up to 2013, the international definition of employment covered not only people working for pay or profit, but also people doing some types of own-use production work (such as subsistence farming) and other types of unpaid work. Thus, it was very difficult, if not impossible, to distinguish subsistence farmers from paid workers and analyse their separate characteristics consistently and coherently. Luckily, in 2013, the 19th International Conference of Labour Statisticians (ICLS) adopted the Resolution concerning statistics of work, employment and labour underutilization which refined the definition of employment to refer only to work for pay or profit and introduced a forms-of-work framework with five forms of work (own-use production work, employment, unpaid trainee work, volunteer work, and other work activities), thus enabling and promoting the separate measurement of participation in different forms of work and the situation of the people involved. The impact of this resolution on key labour market indicators can be assessed with this visualization tool. To date, well over 120 countries have implemented the 19th ICLS standards in their core official source of labour statistics (typically, the Labour Force Survey).
The 19th ICLS resolution also defined subsistence foodstuff producers as all those who did some work to produce foodstuff from agriculture, fishing, hunting or gathering to contribute to the livelihood of the household or family (excluding recreational or leisure activities), recognizing that they constitute an important subgroup of people in own-use production work for policymakers and analysts.
Thanks to these improved international statistical standards, we can now know more about subsistence foodstuff producers, their prevalence, their characteristics, and their (simultaneous) participation in employment. This blog summarizes this new statistical evidence.
Participation in subsistence foodstuff production around the world
Although well over 120 countries have already implemented the 19th ICLS resolution, the very small prevalence of subsistence foodstuff production in many of them (particularly high-income countries) implies that reliable estimates on this activity are not available for every country having applied these standards.
Data available for 35 countries shows great variability in the prevalence of subsistence foodstuff production around the world. The share of the working-age population participating in this activity (whether having also a paid job or not) ranges from less than 5 per cent in some countries (such as Comoros and Madagascar) to more than half in others (such as Malawi, Nepal, Niue, and Vietnam). This wide variability across countries reflects the diversity of local contexts but may also be influenced by differences in survey questionnaire design and the operational criteria used to measure subsistence foodstuff production.
The unweighted average across these 35 countries indicates that around 26 per cent of the working-age population participate in subsistence foodstuff production, highlighting the centrality of this activity for people’s livelihoods in many contexts.
Unsurprisingly, evidence confirms that subsistence foodstuff production is more prevalent in rural areas. The participation rate in subsistence foodstuff production is higher in rural areas than in urban ones in all countries with data except for one (Comoros, where the difference is minimal).
Also, in 18 out of 35 countries with data (around 51 per cent) the share of the working-age population involved in subsistence foodstuff production is higher among women than men. Although in many of these countries the gender gap in this participation rate is not wide, in some others (like Bangladesh, Niue, Samoa, Tonga, and Zambia) it exceeds 15 percentage points, but not always in the same direction.
Subsistence foodstuff production and employment
The rates of participation in subsistence foodstuff production mentioned above refer to everyone taking part in this activity, whether they were also (simultaneously) in employment or not. These total participation rates are very telling, in that they inform on the full extent of subsistence foodstuff production activities.
However, it is also interesting to look at the links between employment and subsistence foodstuff production, the tendency to participate simultaneously in both, and the trade-offs between participation in one and the other.
Once again, data available shows great variability across countries. While almost all subsistence foodstuff producers are not employed in some countries (like Afghanistan and Gambia), the vast majority of them do also have a paid job in many others (such as Uganda, Zambia, and Zimbabwe).
It is worth noting that the share of subsistence foodstuff producers who are not in employment is higher for women than men in 24 out of 28 (86 per cent) of countries with data, reflecting that the traditional gender gap in employment participation also persists among subsistence foodstuff producers.
In 29 out of 37 countries with data (78 per cent), more than half of the working-age population is either employed or a subsistence foodstuff producer (or both). In Afghanistan, Antigua and Barbuda, Armenia, and Bangladesh, over three quarters of the working-age population are involved in one of these two activities (or the two simultaneously). In only two countries (Cook Islands and Côte d’Ivoire), the share of the working-age population in employment is lower than that in subsistence foodstuff production (and not in employment), highlighting the central role of own-use production in the livelihoods of people in these countries.
In some contexts, economic shocks affecting employment and other shocks affecting food security may drive people to resort to participating (or participating more) in subsistence foodstuff production, especially in countries where this activity is already common. For example, when the Covid-19 pandemic hit and all the activity and mobility restrictions to contain it ensued, there was a massive loss of employment, but in some countries, such as Botswana and Uganda, while employment decreased, participation in subsistence foodstuff production increased. This nuanced labour market trend would have been missed with the old employment definition which included subsistence foodstuff producers.
Likewise, the separate identification of subsistence foodstuff producers and the study of their characteristics are crucial to inform policymaking in the context of a structural transformation (such as the promotion of rural diversification).
Other own-use production activities
Subsistence foodstuff production covers a range of different activities, such as processing food for storage, subsistence farming, subsistence fishing, and subsistence hunting. What is more, subsistence foodstuff production is only a subset of own-use production of goods. Own-use production can refer to the production, for final consumption by the producer or their family or household, of goods or services. Own-use production of goods also comprises a wide range of activities, including subsistence foodstuff production, collecting firewood, building or repairing one’s own dwelling, and manufacturing specific goods for own use.
Achieving full coverage of all own-use production of goods in a statistical compilation such as a Labour Force Survey requires several questions, thereby increasing respondent burden. Thus, there is a need to strike a balance between, on the one hand, the need for knowledge on participation in detailed activities within own-use goods production, and, on the other, resource constraints, concerns about accuracy of responses, and the risk of respondents’ fatigue. The ILO has produced model questionnaire content to promote the comprehensive measurement of own-use production of goods through the use of broad categories of own-use goods production activities, recommending that countries adapt the selection based on their local context, including the activities known to be most common, the sample design, the availability of resources for the statistical compilation, data needs for information on detailed activities, etc.
The table below summarizes the numbers of people participating in each broad activity within own-use production of goods, namely, the collection of firewood, fetching water, own-dwelling construction or repair, the manufacture of other goods for own use, and subsistence foodstuff production (and within the latter, processing of food for storage, subsistence farming, subsistence fishing, and subsistence hunting).
Labour underutilization of subsistence foodstuff producers
By enabling the separate identification of subsistence foodstuff producers, the improved international statistical standards allow not only to understand their magnitude, but also their situation and characteristics. As seen above, many subsistence foodstuff producers may be employed (that is, carry out paid work in addition to their own-use production activity). What is more, some of them can be in time-related underemployment, meaning that although they do have a paid job in addition to their subsistence foodstuff production activity, this job covers less hours than they would like and are available for (which may even be the reason for some of them to participate in subsistence foodstuff production). Also, among the subsistence foodstuff producers who are not employed, there may be some desiring to access a paid work activity, that is, with an expressed unmet need for employment. Indeed, subsistence foodstuff producers not in employment can be in unemployment if they are available for and seeking employment, or in the potential labour force if they are available but not seeking or seeking but not available.
It was conceptually impossible to analyse these details about the simultaneous participation of subsistence foodstuff producers in employment and their unmet need for employment back when the old employment definition pooled together paid work, subsistence foodstuff production, and other own-use and unpaid activities.
In fact, data available on 32 countries shows that subsistence foodstuff producers have a higher tendency to be in labour underutilization than the rest of the working-age population. In 72 per cent of countries with data, the composite labour underutilization rate (covering time-related underemployment, unemployment, and the potential labour force) is higher among subsistence foodstuff producers than the rest. When focusing on men, the proportion remains the same – men in subsistence foodstuff production have higher labour underutilization rates than the rest in 72 per cent of countries with data – while it decreases slightly for women – women in subsistence foodstuff production have higher labour underutilization rates than the rest in 66 per cent of countries with data.
Concluding remarks
The improved international statistical standards have enabled a deeper understanding of subsistence foodstuff producers, their numbers, situation, characteristics, and role in societies and the economy. All of this is crucial for policymakers, researchers, and analysts looking to improve the wellbeing and work conditions of everyone, leaving no one behind. This blog has provided a very first snapshot of people’s participation in subsistence foodstuff production based on the study of the numbers of people participating in this activity, their simultaneous participation in employment, and their labour underutilization.
However, the intensity of the participation in subsistence foodstuff production can vary widely from one person to another. In fact, the extent of this intensity may influence the possibilities for simultaneous participation in employment, the availability for employment, and the job-search activities. Thus, for greater insights, the study of participation rates and figures should be complemented with the analysis of hours spent in subsistence foodstuff production and output volumes.
Additionnally, for an increased understanding of the situation of subsistence foodstuff producers, the analysis should also capture their access (or lack thereof) to markets and factors of production, as well as potential gender and age-related dimensions.
