Towards A Model of Sustainable Urban Agriculture: A Case Study of Ashaiman, Accra

MSc Environment & Sustainable Development
DPU Field Work 2009

TOWARDS A MODEL OF
SUSTAINABLE URBAN AGRICULTURE:
A CASE STUDY OF ASHAIMAN, GHANA

1 June 2009

DPU Field Work 2009

REPORT BY ‐
ASHAIMAN GROUP:

SARAH ADAMS
SHANILA ATHULATHMUDALI
ERIKA BREYER
CATHERINE BURGESS
ABIGAIL BURRIDGE
BASMA GABER
SHAILEAN HARDY
DANIEL ODEKINA
JENNY PERRY
ELISE ROTSZTAIN
RIEKO SUZUKI
TRAVIS WOODWARD

DPU Field Work 2009
Ashaiman Group

TABLE OF CONTENTS

i ABBREVIATIONS
ii PREFACE
iii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 PURPOSE OF STUDY
1 BACKGROUND: THE STUDY AREAS
1 Ashaiman‐Tema
1 GIDA
3 Roman Down
3 DEFINITION OF SUA AND CRITERIA
4 ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK
5 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
6 Limitations
6 FINDINGS, DIAGNOSIS AND STRATEGIES
7 Waste
11 Water
14 Gender
17 Linking Farmers Together
21 Opening a Dialogue
22 ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS
22 CONCLUSIONS: INSTITUTIONALISING SUSTAINABLE URBAN AGRICULTURE

25 REFERENCES

27 APPENDIX 1: SUSTAINABLE URBAN AGRICULTURE THEMES AND CRITERIA
29 APPENDIX 2: SEMI‐STRUCTURED QUESTIONNAIRES (FARMERS EXAMPLE)
32 APPENDIX 3: FOCUS GROUP METHODOLOGY
35 APPENDIX 4: SCHEDULE OF RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
37 APPENDIX 5: DATA COMPILATION AND ANALYSIS
39 APPENDIX 6: IRRIGATION WATER SOURCES
40 APPENDIX 7: WATER STRATEGIES

DPU Field Work 2009
Ashaiman Group

LIST OF FIGURES

2 Figure 1: Map of Study Areas
4 Figure 2: Food Security & Urban Agriculture
7 Figure 3: Farmers using chemical fertilisers
8 Figure 4: Example of community composting facility
8 Figure 5: Zoom Lion, the private company who has an agreement with the
AshMA to collect waste
11 Figure 6: GIDA site irrigation system
12 Figure 7: GIDA Ashaiman Dam Water Flows
13 Figure 8: Encroaching residential developments built adjacent to the reservoir
13 Figure 9: RD Farmer Emmanuel demonstrating the pumping system that the
farmers use to extract water
23 Figure 10: Strategies for SUA in Ashaiman ‐ A Framework for Strategic Collective
Action
24 Figure 11: Ashaiman Stakeholder Analysis with Influence of SUA Strategies at the
National and Local Levels

LIST OF TABLES

9 Table 1: Proposed Waste Strategies
10 Table 2: Monitoring and Impact Assessment for Waste
15 Table 3: Proposed Water Strategies
16 Table 4: Monitoring and Impact Assessment for Water
18 Table 5: Proposed Gender Strategies
19 Table 6: Monitoring and Impact Assessment for Gender
20 Table 7: Proposed Cooperative Strategies
20 Table 8: Monitoring and Impact Assessment for Cooperatives
21 Table 9: Proposed Strategy to Open Dialogue
22 Table 10: Monitoring and Impact Assessment for Opening Dialogue

DPU Field Work 2009
Ashaiman Group

ABBREVIATIONS

AMA Accra Metropolitan Assembly
AshMA Ashaiman Municipal Assembly
AWGUPA Accra Working Group on Urban and Peri‐Urban Agriculture
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
GAMA Greater Accra Metropolitan Area
GIDA Ghana Irrigation Development Authority
IWMI International Water Management Institute
JICA Japan International Cooperation Agency
MoFA Ministry of Food and Agriculture
NDPC National Development Planning Commission
RD Roman Down
RUAF Resource Centres on Urban Agriculture and Food Security
SUA Sustainable Urban Agriculture
TCPD Town and Country Planning Department
TDC Tema Development Corporation
ToR Terms of Reference
UA Urban Agriculture
WMD Waste Management Department

i | P a g e

DPU Field Work 2009
Ashaiman Group

PREFACE

The Ashaiman Group would like to thank the many lecturers, experts, and organisations who supported
us before, during and after our expedition to Ghana. We would especially like to thank IWMI for
hosting us, Mrs Memuna Mattah, our excellent facilitator and translator, Mr Nii Ofoe Hansen, the
Scheme Manager at the Irrigation Development Site, Mr Sam Nukpor, Director of the Ashaiman
Municipal Directorate of Food and Agriculture, and all of the farmers who extended their hospitality to
us and generously offered so much of their time for our research. We would also like to express our
appreciation to the Ashaiman Municipal Assembly and the Ashaiman Stool for so graciously receiving
us and to Joyce Decutt from MoFA for keeping us informed about the positive developments that are
taking place as a result of our presence in Ashaiman. The group feels privileged to have helped catalyse
change that will assist the farmers at Roman Down. The spirit of the farmers and those that support
them was inspiring.

We would also like to thank the DPU staff for their on‐going support, especially Adriana Allen, Hannah
Griffiths and Alex Frediani.
ii | P a g e

DPU Field Work 2009
Ashaiman Group

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

It is estimated that over 50% of the world’s population now lives in cities (Deelstra and Girardet 2000,
Mougeot 2006). A growing urban population requires a growing volume of food, and whilst it is
assumed that this food will be transported into the city either from rural areas or from overseas, this
raises significant sustainability issues. Food grown within a city provides opportunities for the city to
feed itself. The City of Accra in Ghana has been growing at an average of 4% per year since the 1970s
(Ghana Ministry of Local Government 1992). Today, 24% of households in Accra are considered ‘food
insecure’, meaning that these households lack basic calories and spend a high proportion of their
income on food. Forty per cent are considered vulnerable, in that they have enough food for now, but
still spend a high proportion of income of food, making them vulnerable to seasonal and price changes,
or other global food supply issues (Maxwell et al 2000, 80).

Growing food in cities, or Urban Agriculture (UA), has wide benefits for the economy, society and the
environment. For example, UA enables lower income groups to grow food for subsistence, provides
employment and income opportunities, reducing poverty and increasing city productivity.

The group was tasked with investigating UA in the Municipality of Ashaiman, to establish whether it
was sustainable, and if not, to propose interventions that would take Ashaiman on the path to
Sustainable Urban Agriculture (SUA).

During the team’s five month investigation into SUA in Ashaiman, Ghana, the team discovered:

 How the problem of managing an increasing volume of waste created by an increasing urban
population is polluting and threatening existing UA
 How water is essential for the survival of UA, but that its use as a means to dispose of waste
can threaten the safety of food in the city, and ultimately food security
 How important women are, in terms of providing nutrition to the family, in taking a progressive
role in farming, in scaling up networks of farmers and in the trading of food
 How cooperation between farming groups is necessary to ensure a future for UA
 How UA can open a dialogue between key decision makers
 How UA can be catalyzed into SUA through using a framework for strategic collective action

As a result, the Team has made strategic recommendations to address waste management, to improve

water quality, to promote the role of women in urban farming, to enable collaboration between
farming associations and to formalize the opening of dialogue and strategic collective action for SUA in
Ashaiman.
iii | P a g e

DPU Field Work 2009
Ashaiman Group
PURPOSE OF STUDY

The purpose of this study is to examine UA in Greater Accra, focusing on the Ghana Irrigation
Development Authority (GIDA) and Roman Down (RD) farming sites in Ashaiman, in the Greater Accra
Metropolitan Area (GAMA). The team’s objectives, addressing the Terms of Reference (ToR) are to:

1. Understand the current system of urban agriculture in Tema and wider Accra;
2. Assess the sustainability of current agricultural practices;
3. Assess existing strategies (if any) that promote sustainable urban agriculture;
4. Diagnose possible implementation policies to promote sustainable urban agriculture;
5. Determine how the team’s diagnosis would lead to sustainable urban agriculture in Ashaiman.

BACKGROUND: THE STUDY AREAS

The location of the chosen study areas presents a unique research opportunity. The sites are located
in the only planned region in the GAMA: Ashaiman‐Tema and are also associated with the government
agency GIDA. The fact that these sites have been planned and are connected to a government body
allows for laboratory‐like conditions in which to examine UA in Accra compared to other sites.

Ashaiman‐Tema

The Tema port area was built 25 km east of Accra in 1962 as an export processing zone, which relieved
some of the population pressure from the ever‐expanding city. The land to develop the town was
compulsory purchased by the Tema Development Corporation (TDC) from its traditional customary
owners. In contrast to the haphazardly developed Accra, Tema was designed with a Master Plan and a
portion of its land was specifically designated for UA. In the 1980s the district received many migrants
who were unemployed and impoverished as a result of the country’s Structural Adjustment
Programmes. Many turned to farming when they could not find other work (Boakye 2008, Grant and
Yankson 2003). In 2008 a township with a large informal settlement in Tema, Ashaiman, was made an
autonomous district and given its own municipal government, the AshMA, in keeping with Ghana’s
decentralisation policies (Ghana Districts 2008, Larbi 1996).

GIDA

In the early 1960s GIDA purchased 79 hectares of the land next to a reservoir designated for
agriculture from the TDC. In 1968 construction of a dam was completed and land was parceled out to
farmers who could access the dam water (see Figure 1). Unlike many other urban agriculture sites,

1 | P a g e

DPU Field Work 2009
Ashaiman Group
these farmers currently have land security and pay six month renewable leases to GIDA (Boakye 2008).
Food grown on the site includes traditional crops such as maize and okra, as well as fish farms and rice
paddies.

2 | P a g e

DPU Field Work 2009
Ashaiman Group
Roman Down

The other site, RD, is just outside of the GIDA Scheme and is cultivated by farmers who have an
informal agreement with GIDA to use the land (see Figure 1). Most of the farmers inherited their plots
from their fathers who started farming around the same time the GIDA dam was built. There are
approximately 60 farmers on the site, half of whom belong to the Roman Down Cooperative Farmers
Society. There are nearly 20 female farmers who farm with their husbands, in contrast to the
independent GIDA female farmers.

DEFINITION OF SUA AND CRITERIA

To address the ToR, the team formulated a definition for sustainable urban agriculture (SUA):

“SUA is a resilient process of the production of crops for subsistence or commercial consumption in
urban and peri‐urban areas where it is: equitable; protects and enhances the environment, health,
personal and social well‐being, which is embedded in national and local governance; supports local
jobs and income opportunities and incorporates traditional knowledge systems”.

From this definition eight themes were established:

For each theme, criteria were specified to assess the sustainability of UA as it is currently practiced at
GIDA and RD sites (see Appendix 1). Reviewing these criteria enabled the team to identify existing
avenues of support for UA and analyze areas that require intervention. They have helped the team
delve further to formulate interventions that promote sustainable urban agriculture.

3 | P a g e

DPU Field Work 2009
Ashaiman Group
ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK

To refine the concept of SUA further, the case study sites and interventions were analysed through the
lens of ‘food security’. WHO explains: “food security exists when all people at all times have access to
sufficient, safe, nutritious food to maintain a healthy and active life” (World Health Organization,
2009). This includes having physical, economic and social access to food that meets peoples’ dietary
needs as well as their food preferences.

Illustrated in Figure 2, food security is built on three pillars: food availability, food access, and food use.
There are four main issues that contribute to food security: sustainable economic development and
trade, environment, health and agriculture.

In order to accommodate urban population growth, it is important for a city to be able to feed itself. In
Accra, UA is already feeding the city. According to the International Water Management Institute

(IWMI), 90% of Accra’s fresh vegetables are grown within the city. If vegetables were not produced
within the city it would cost Ghana US$14 million annually to import vegetables from neighbouring
countries (Drechsel et al 2006). From the research and fieldwork, however, the team concluded that
4 | P a g e

DPU Field Work 2009
Ashaiman Group
current UA practices in Accra are not sustainable. This was an entry point for the team to take it one
step further and examine how to promote a form of SUA that is embedded in local and national
institutional frameworks.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Prior to the fieldwork component of the research, an extensive literature review was undertaken to
understand the field of UA, the contextual factors shaping its practice in Accra, and the particularities
of the Ashaiman municipality in which the study sites are located. This was supplemented by seminars
from experts in these subjects.

The fieldwork on which this paper is based was carried out over a two‐week period in May 2009. At
both sites, a number of methods were used to gain insight about farming practices, challenges the
farmers face, and their perceptions of the proposed interventions. As a means of direct observation,
transect walks were led by the farmers from which a perception map (Figure 1) was compiled. Informal
conversations were had at this time with farmers, including representatives of their cooperatives, and
officials from MoFA and GIDA. Group interviews using semi‐structured questionnaires were held with
farmers (see Appendix 2 for questionnaires). Daily activity focus group discussions were held with
farmers as well, separated by gender to differentiate between male and female roles. Finally, seasonal
analysis focus group discussions were held with male farmers to understand farming practices year‐
round, instead of a snapshot of the rainy season when the fieldwork was conducted (see Appendix 3
for focus group methodology). A total of approximately 100 farmers were interviewed, of which
approximately 35 were female and 65 were male.

Semi‐structured interviews were also conducted with local stakeholders specific to the study areas
including residents of the Ashaiman community, female traders at the Ashaiman Market, residents of
the encroachment, members of the AshMA, the traditional landowners, and the Ashaiman Stool.
Further seminars and question and answer sessions were attended over the course of the fieldwork to
obtain a more holistic picture of UA in Accra from different stakeholders. These included the IWMI, the
Ashaiman Municipal Assembly, the Accra Waste Management Department (WMD) and the

Environment Protection Agency (EPA), among others. Appendix 4 sets out a complete schedule of
research methods and institution interviews, and Appendix 5 a description of data compilation and
analysis.
5 | P a g e

DPU Field Work 2009
Ashaiman Group
Limitations

In order to ensure transparency of the process and the findings, the Team noted their limitations in the
execution of the research. These limitations included the short period of time available for the
research and the field trip, which also reduced the timeframe within which other actors and academics
could be engaged, and a lack of data specific to Ashaiman and Tema for analysis. There is also the
added constraint of a language barrier. Although the respondents were enthusiastic about the
research, there are inevitably elements of understanding lost in translation between the researchers,
interpreters and respondents, particularly as the interpreters and respondents were occasionally from
different regions with different dialects.

It also must be noted that the team are not experts in agriculture, irrigation, waste management or
wastewater treatment technology, but found that expectations upon arriving in Ghana were that the
team consisted of such experts, and so this may have influenced expectations of outcomes of the
research.

There are also a number of biases present in the research. The Team, although from 9 different
countries with very different backgrounds, are all interested in environment and sustainable
development, and so interpret the information through this critical lens. The Team also brings its own
assumptions on environmental problems and UA and how this relates to sustainability. The
respondents: farmers, officials, NGOs and academics, also frequently had an agenda that they were
pursuing to improve access to land or the quality of water, for example, and so these kinds of issues
were inevitably highlighted over others in the research.

FINDINGS, DIAGNOSIS AND STRATEGIES

The following section diagnoses the findings from the study and recommends strategies for improving
the prospects for SUA on the GIDA and RD sites. Each intervention is summarised in a table that sets
out the strategy, who should be involved, the timeframe for the intervention, why the intervention is
being proposed, and how the intervention could be implemented. A secondary table relates each
intervention to the criteria for achieving SUA and proposes indicators and a monitoring regime. The
interventions are proposed in three phases: immediate to short term, medium term and long term.
Immediate to short term interventions are designed to immediately minimise risk or provide benefit,
medium term are intermediary interventions to adapt to risk or provide a step change to
improvement, and long term interventions are those to be initiated immediately, but with a long life
span, and focus on mitigating the problem, eliminating it at source or providing institutional changes.

6 | P a g e

DPU Field Work 2009
Ashaiman Group
Waste

Insufficient collection of solid waste in Ashaiman has resulted in the dumping and accumulation of
waste in the waterways upon which local farmers depend to irrigate their crops. The quality of the
water used to irrigate crops on both sites has been diminished, and the safety of the crops being grown
on the RD site has been affected. However, according to the WMD, 60% of waste generated in GAMA
is organic, so the current waste problem in Ashaiman could be turned into an opportunity to provide
farmers with an abundant supply of organic fertilisers through the use of compost.

However, there are obstacles
preventing the adoption of such
organic fertilisers. Currently,
farmers use predominantly
chemical fertilisers (Figure 3), and
the seasonal analysis focus groups
revealed that, although farmers are
aware that organic fertilisers such
as compost are better for the soil,
they still perceive chemical
fertilisers as providing faster crop
growth and more abundant yields
in the short term. In addition, MoFA provides fertiliser subsidies in the form of monthly coupons,
whereby one coupon reduces the price of one unit of chemical fertiliser by 50%. Therefore, the
decision to switch to organic inputs is difficult for farmers who are trying to cut costs, as subsidised
chemical fertilisers are less costly than compost, which must also be stored and transported.

At the same time, farmers noted increasing salinity of the soil and worries over lower soil fertility. A
2008 UN report on organic agriculture and food security (UNEP 2008) showed that while organic
conversion in tropical Africa is associated with an initial, short‐term yield reduction, yields actually
increase in the long term. The use of chemicals is unsustainable in the long term, as petro‐chemical
inputs deplete soil nutrients over time. (Ananthakrishnan 1978). Moreover, the subsidies provided by
MoFA are apparently temporary, and even at their current levels, they are not sufficient to cover all of
the farmers’ fertiliser needs. Therefore, high quality, locally available compost could become an

attractive alternative to chemical inputs if farmers were also aware of the long‐term benefits of
switching.
7 | P a g e

DPU Field Work 2009
Ashaiman Group
In this context, a community‐based composting scheme (Figure 4) could provide a viable organic
alternative to chemical fertilisers if the subsidies provided by MoFA could be reallocated to compost
production and the construction of a local community composting facility. Since the production
process would be coordinated within and by the community, the cost of the compost and transport to
the farmers’ site would be lower than more centralised schemes. In addition, the AshMA mentioned in
an interview with the research team that they were currently in negotiations with a private Italian
waste management company to provide waste
collection, separation and recycling in
Ashaiman. This would indicate that there are
economic incentives in setting up a scheme for
waste collection and separation, and the point
of contention may be whether a private
company or the community retains the profits
of such an arrangement. Since managing waste
at the community level involves many
stakeholders as well as changes in attitude
toward waste, a multi‐tiered approach to
introduce the composting scheme and improve
overall waste management in Ashaiman is
proposed in Tables 1‐2.
8 | P a g e

DPU Field Work 2009
Ashaiman Group
9 | P a g e

DPU Field Work 2009
Ashaiman Group
10 | P a g e

DPU Field Work 2009
Ashaiman Group
Water

A significant finding was the actual locations of the two farm sites and their water sources (see Figure
1). On the GIDA site, the farmers on the left bank have free access to water as part of their lease. This
water is flows onto their farms via reinforced irrigation channels and sluices, assisted by gravitational
forces. This reinforced irrigation system was funded and implemented by the Japan International
Cooperation Agency (JICA) in 2001 in conjunction with an aid project that also rehabilitated some of
the dam and built a research and training centre called the Irrigation Development Centre (Figure 6).

However, the farmers on the right bank have to pump their water from the GIDA drain, which collects
the water after it has flowed across the left bank (Figure 7). It is likely that this water is contaminated
by the artificial fertilisers and pesticides used by farmers on the left bank. The right bank farmers pay
lower rent to compensate for the expense of maintenance and fuel for the pumps.
11 | P a g e

DPU Field Work 2009
Ashaiman Group

An issue of great concern to GIDA is the development of middle‐income residential properties that are
encroaching near the reservoir (Figure 8). The residents of these properties are suspected of dumping
waste directly into the water. This area is on the flood plain and when flooding occurs, the water
deposits the waste from this community into the dam, polluting the water and causing the dam to silt
up. It was not possible to confirm how these houses were granted permission to the land; residents
claimed it was through the Ashaiman stool, other sources claimed it was through the AshMA or GIDA,
whilst the Ashaiman stool, AshMA and GIDA themselves all claimed the developments were illegal,
demonstrating the complexity of land issues in GAMA.
12 | P a g e

DPU Field Work 2009
Ashaiman Group

The source of water for irrigation for RD is the Ashaiman city drain, from which the farmers pump
water in the dry season. This water source would have been clean 50 years ago but is now
contaminated with waste from the growing township (see Appendix 6). The GIDA scheme, originally
intended to include RD, was unable to be extended because it was not possible to take water from the
dam across the river that is now the city drain.

The RD farmers use furrow irrigation, which reduces the risk of crop contamination as the water does
not splash onto the vegetables. In the rainy season, when wastewater irrigation is not necessary, crops
grown include peppers and tomatoes, which are eaten raw. In the dry season, these types of crops are
13 | P a g e

DPU Field Work 2009
Ashaiman Group
discouraged and crops that are cooked, such as maize and okra are grown. Although the farmers on
RD do not pay for the land, they estimate that the cost of using pumps to extract water is more
expensive than even the left bank farmers’ leases (Figure 9).

Farmers from both sites stated that they have access to an adequate supply of water all year, but that
it is the quality of the water that is of concern as a result of pollution from the Ashaiman Township and
the encroaching developments near the dam. This pollution is exacerbated by the damming of the
river by right bank farmers to flood their fields with water. This causes polluted water to back‐flow
into the GIDA drain, polluting this site.

To address this, short term strategies to train famers on selecting crops less vulnerable to
contamination are recommended. There is a risk that this could negatively affect the income
opportunities of the farmers, but RD farmers stated that very few grow vulnerable crops and that some
training has already taken place on this issue. GIDA and IWMI supported technical interventions to
adapt the existing infrastructure to reduce the pollution of the water sources feeding the two farm
sites, and also to supply more water to the right bank farmers on the GIDA site. As such, a settlement
pond, decanter digester and anaerobic filter system (Bodard 1996), and spillways have been
recommended (see Appendix 7 for more information). Such technical interventions require capital
investment, and land would need to be set aside for such purposes. See Tables 3‐4.

Gender

The farmer’s cooperatives (at RD and GIDA) have both male and female members. At RD there are
approximately 60 farmers, 30 of whom (22 men and 8 women) are current members of the
cooperative, and on the GIDA site the cooperative is comprised of 93 farmers, 76 men and 17 women.
On the GIDA site, 14 of the 17 women farm independently on their own plots. In contrast to this, the
RD women farmers have no formal rights to the land they use, and so depend upon male family
members to set aside a portion for use. Both male and female farmers on both sites noted that GIDA
was unique in its provision of land directly to women. This reflects the findings by Danso et al (2004),
which depict that customary law has historically made no provision for women to acquire access to
land independently from men. The majority of women on the GIDA site are widowed or unmarried
which, the team hypothesised, was a key factor in their ability to seek land tenure in a culture that has
not traditionally accepted women’s association with land. In addition, there is a women’s
representative in the GIDA farmer’s cooperative, although all cooperative leadership positions on both
sites are held exclusively by men. This led the team to conclude that, while women receive a number of

training and extension services through the cooperatives, they are not necessarily able to influence
how the cooperatives are run.
14 | P a g e

DPU Field Work 2009
Ashaiman Group
15 | P a g e

DPU Field Work 2009
Ashaiman Group
16 | P a g e

DPU Field Work 2009
Ashaiman Group
Additional barriers to entry into farming as a profession were related to women being able to reconcile
their roles as mothers and wives with laborious farm tasks. Through constructing daily activity
timelines with both men and women in focus groups, the team found that the burden of work for
women on both sites is higher than that of men. For example, women typically start work earlier in the
morning to prepare breakfast and get the children ready for school, while men head straight for the
farm. Women also have to return home from the fields earlier in the day to tend to household chores,
cook the evening meal, conduct petty trading from their homes and attend to the children after school.
Even with these barriers, all of the women farmers on both sites noted the importance of farming as a
family tradition. The GIDA site women farmers are mostly migrants from rural areas and find the GIDA
scheme a way for them to continue the farming they had practiced before moving to the city. Even
though most farming in greater Accra is for cash cropping (Obuobie et al 2004), the women farmers
that were interviewed on both sites highlighted that farming provides a way for them to feed their
families, even in times of economic hardship.

The GIDA representative noted that even with a heavier workload, the women farmers on the GIDA
site were the best performers in terms of production and loan repayment and tended to take on less
debt in general. Therefore, farming can be a significant way to promote food security at the household
level by complementing women’s current roles as farmers and household food providers. To promote
gender equity as an integral part of a system of SUA, the strategies and processes for monitoring and
evaluation in Tables 5‐6 are proposed.

Linking Farmers Together

The farmers’ cooperatives in Ashaiman act as organised support networks, where issues are discussed
and problems shared. Farmers on both sites receive training on farming methods, which is well
received, but an interest was expressed in broadening training to marketing. Even though the farmers
have formed cooperatives, they are locked into their relationship with the female traders, who sell
their produce at the local market. Since the farmers only earn income at harvest time, they
supplement their purchase of agricultural inputs by borrowing from the traders, who have a steady
cash flow. They are therefore beholden to the traders and often must accept reduced prices for their
crops. The farmers’ cooperatives on both of the sites have agreements that they will not sell below a
certain price, but the traders are more organised with a monopoly on the markets. They take
advantage of the fact that farmers need to sell before their crops spoil and that the traders have many
other customers. The aforementioned women’s savings group could help to address the power
struggle that farmers currently face in terms of borrowing small loans from market women, whilst
harnessing the female farmers’ strength, that of managing money.

17 | P a g e

DPU Field Work 2009
Ashaiman Group

18 | P a g e

DPU Field Work 2009
Ashaiman Group

The farmers from the study sites in Ashaiman do not currently take part in forms of collective action (in
terms of mobilizing their resources) beyond their cooperatives. Linking farmer’s cooperatives would
provide farmers with a platform on which to share knowledge, resources and ideas, and capitalize on
their collective power as providers of food for Ashaiman, the city of Accra and its surrounding
communities. Following the Team’s visit to the RD site, the secretary of the RD farmers association
provided the team with a list of farmers wanting to join the co operative. The list showed an additional
11 female farmers and 8 male farmers wanting to join, and these applications appeared to be because
the farmers saw the Team’s visit as a sign that there was momentum for change.

As a starting point, it is proposed that a list of all cooperatives be obtained from the registrar, whilst
MoFA extension officers act as facilitators and organisers of regular round table meetings. The medium
term proposal is to extend the ‘cooperative network’ beyond those farmers in the cooperatives, linking
‘communities’ of farmers regardless of their current membership status. This strategy is built upon the
values of social inclusion and decentralization in order to establish a grassroots organisation or
network of farmers. Empowerment (of the farmers) would be the central goal, and communication
would be key to fostering an environment in which resources can be collectively mobilized in order to
influence a degree of authority and power. See Tables 7‐8.

19 | P a g e

DPU Field Work 2009
Ashaiman Group

20 | P a g e

DPU Field Work 2009
Ashaiman Group
Opening a Dialogue

The team discovered that there had been no dialogue between key land and UA stakeholders in
Ashaiman. The team met the Ashaiman stool accompanied by a representative from GIDA and MoFA,
which was the first time that these organisations had met. The linking of these actors together enabled
the history and claims to the site and possible solutions to be shared in a productive and open way. At
this meeting, the future of the RD farmers was called into question, with the stool claiming the land.
The stool stated that they were willing to consider supporting the farmers on the site if an
arrangement could be set up that mutually benefited the community, such as donating a portion of the
produce. The representative from GIDA, Hansen, made clear that he would act as an advocate for the
farmers, and would liaise between the farmers and the chieftaincy to create an open dialogue. Since
returning home from Accra, the team has been notified that MoFA, the Council of Elders in Ashaiman,
and some executives of the RD farmers, have met and discussed the situation, which has led to the quit
order to be withdrawn. This indicates that such a dialogue could continue into the future to secure
land for UA in Ashaiman.

Based on the experiences of the other teams, it is apparent that not all chieftaincies are as open to
dialogue and setting aside land for UA as the Ashaiman stool. Land scarcity is still a critical issue for the
future of UA and the team recommends that wherever possible, multi‐stakeholder dialogue takes
place to discuss land use planning before opinions are formed and decisions are made. See Tables 9‐10.

21 | P a g e

DPU Field Work 2009
Ashaiman Group

ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS

Whilst the Team feels that the strategies proposed in this study are feasible, other large scale
strategies were proposed by stakeholders and members of the team that could provide contribute
towards promoting UA and achieving SUA. However, these strategies require significant investment,
and as such, are considered to be outside the scope of this study, but could offer opportunities for
additional research by other organisations. These large‐scale strategies include:
 Increasing the dam capacity, rehabilitating the right bank and dredging the dam of silt deposits
 The development of an anaerobic digestion system to manage waste
 Enhancing infrastructure within Ashaiman so wastewater from households can be disposed of
appropriately

A more immediate and achievable opportunity for the institutionalisation of UA in Ashaiman is in the
development of their by‐laws. As a newly formed Municipal Assembly (formed in February 2008), the
AshMA has the responsibility of forming new local by‐laws, that incorporate national priorities but that
are appropriate to the local level. There are a range of opportunities relating to the by‐laws. These
are:
 Formation of by‐laws in an inclusive and participatory manner
 By‐laws that secure UA as a priority for Ashaiman, such as securing land for UA
 By‐laws that do not impede the practise UA

CONCLUSIONS: INSTITUTIONALISING SUSTAINABLE URBAN AGRICULTURE

In proposing strategies, it was important to consider how addressing the waste, water, land tenure and
gender equity issues at the Ashaiman sites would fit into a larger framework for promoting SUA at the

22 | P a g e

DPU Field Work 2009
Ashaiman Group
city and national level. Using Levy’s (2007) framework for strategic collective action, which is illustrated
in Figure 10, the team sought to ensure that (1) stakeholders had the opportunity to come together to
understand their common problems and opportunities and determine a collective intent for action, (2)
both farmers and the surrounding communities would be part of organisations that would build
collective capacity to address waste, water and land issues at the grassroots level, (3) the farmers and
communities would be linked to institutions who could advocate for their interests to the AshMA and
central government, and create linkages for dialogue on key issues affecting farmers and surrounding
communities, and (4) the surrounding communities, the local government and the wider city
population could see their role in managing local water and waste issues and come to support UA as
contributing to the health of the city. The final key element is to point to the GIDA site as a laboratory
for testing innovative strategies. Having a site which could demonstrate the success of new agricultural
techniques, cooperative structures and savings strategies could serve to set positive new precedents
for action on a city‐wide level through learning exchanges and inviting city officials to publicly share in
successes. See Levy (2007) and Boonyabancha (2005) for case studies that illustrate the power of
learning exchanges and precedent setting in urban interventions.

23 | P a g e

DPU Field Work 2009
Ashaiman Group
It is also important that local action is complemented and supplemented by national policies that
respect the rights of farmers and convey their importance in terms of feeding the city. The team wishes
to emphasise that UA needs to be officially recognised and granted its place in the national policies of
Ghana. Urban agriculture feeding the city could be a driver for social change and environmental
protection. It is a source of affordable food for the urban population and therefore plays a crucial role
in terms of food security and urban livelihoods. The team recommends that AshMA, as the local level
of government in Ashaiman, opinion leaders and any other stakeholders pool resources for the
institutionalization and mainstreaming of UA, as set out in Figure 11. The team particularly advocate
the inclusion of UA in the development initiatives proposed by the National Development and
Commission of Ghana.

24 | P a g e

DPU Field Work 2009
Ashaiman Group
REFERENCES

Ananthakrishnan, S. (1978). “Agriculture and development strategy: a case for organic fertilisers”. In
Harle, Vliho (ed.) The Political Economy of Food. Westmead: Saxon House.

Boakye, Samuel (2008). “Sustaining urban farming: Explaining why farmers make investment in the
absence of secure tenure with new evidence from Ghana”, DSA Conference, September 2008.

Boonyabancha, Somsook (2005). “Baan Mankong: going to scale with ‘slum’ and squatter upgrading in
Thailand”, Environment & Urbanization, Vol. 17, No. 1, pp. 21‐46.

Bodard, P. (1996) A Agua e saneamento no Nordeste do Brasil: Estudos de Casol. GRET Urbano Brasil.
PSEou, France, pp. 21‐22.

Danso G., Cofie, O., Annang, L., Obuobie, E., and B. Keraita (2004). “Gender and Urban Agriculture: The
case of Accra, Ghana”. Paper presented at the RUAF/IWMI/ Urban Harvest Woman Feeding Cities
Workshop on Gender Mainstreaming in Urban Food Production and Food Security. 20‐23 September,
2004. Accra, Ghana.

Deelstra, T. And Girardet, H. (2000). “Urban agriculture and sustainable cities”, in: Bakker, N.;
Dubbeling, M.; Guendel, S.; Sabel‐Koschella, U.; Zeeuw, H. (eds). Growing Cities, Growing Food: Urban
Agriculture on the Policy Agenda. Feldafing (Germany): DSE, pp.43‐65.

Drechsel, Pay, Sophie Graefe, Moise Sonou, and Olufunke O. Cofie (2006). “Informal Irrigation in Urban
West Africa: An Overview”, IWMI Research Report 102.

Ghana Districts (2008). “Ashaiman municipal”, [Online] Available at:
http://www.ghanadistricts.com/districts/?news&r=1&_=171, (Accessed 24 May 2009).

Ghana Ministry of Local Government (1992). “Strategic plan for the Greater Accra Metropolitan Area”,
Volume 1, Context report, Accra: Department of Town and Country Planning.

Grant, R. and P. Yankson (2003). “City Profile: Accra”, Cities, Vol. 20, No. 1, pp. 65–74.

Larbi, W. Odami (1996). “Spatial planning and urban fragmentation in Accra”, Third World Planning
Review, Vol. 18, pp. 193‐214.

25 | P a g e

DPU Field Work 2009
Ashaiman Group
Levy, C. (2007). “Defining Collective Strategic Action led by Civil Society Organisations: The case of
CLIFF, India”. 8th N‐AERUS Conference, London: DPU‐UCL.

Maxwell, Daniel, Carol Levin, Margaret Armar‐Klemesu, Marie Ruel, Saul Morris and Clement Ahiadeke
(2000). Urban Livelihoods and Food and Nutrition Security in Greater Accra, Ghana. Washington DC:
IFPRI, [Online] Available at:
http://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/WHO_multicountry_%20study_Ghana.pdf, (Accessed 29
May 2009).

Mougeot, L. (2006). Growing Better Cities: Urban Agriculture for Sustainable Development. Ontario,
Canada: International Development Research Centre.

Obuobie, E., P. Drechsel and G. Danso (2004). “Gender in open‐space irrigated urban vegetable farming
in Accra”, Urban Agriculture Magazine, No. 12, pp. 13‐15.

United Nations Environment Program (2008). “Organic Agriculture and Food Security in Africa”, United
Nations Conference on Trade and Development, New York: United Nations, pp. 1‐47.

World Health Organization (2009). “Trade, foreign policy, diplomacy, and health: Food security”,
[Online] Available at: http://www.who.int/trade/glossary/story028/en/, (Accessed 24 May 2009).

26 | P a g e

DPU Field Work 2009
Ashaiman Group
APPENDIX 1: SUSTAINABLE URBAN AGRICULTURE THEMES AND CRITERIA

Theme Criteria
Resilience Sufficient crops are produced to feed local people and eliminate dependency on
overseas imports.
A diversity of crops and crop species are produced to safe‐guard food supply against
disease.
Households are able to produce their own food for consumption, reducing their
vulnerability to market/price/ income shocks
Locally available, safe, organic inputs are used, reducing dependency on external
supplies
Equity Equitable access and transfer of knowledge, opportunities, training, resources and
equipment for sustainable urban agriculture.
Equal access to sufficient and affordable food to enable the people of Tema to be
healthy.
Equal income generating opportunities are available for men and women.
Environment The use of organic, safe, good quality fertilizers to increase and sustain the
productivity of the land.
The use of a natural predatory system and natural agricultural systems to manage
pests
The existence of local composting schemes that are accessible, affordable and
appropriate for the needs of local farmers.
The use of a low input agricultural system that does not use / minimises the use of
fossil fuels at any stage, from production to consumption.
The use of wastewater for irrigation where it is used in a safe manner and the
complementary use of rainwater harvesting for irrigation and vegetable washing to
reduce water extraction and food contamination.
Health and Farming practices and food practices use water that is safe or made safe in irrigation
Safety practices to prevent contamination that is detrimental to health.
Farmers are aware of the occupational and consumer health risks associated with their
profession and who act on this awareness to reduce and eliminate the risks.
The organic fertilisers used in farming practices are mature and uncontaminated by
chemicals.
Sufficient quantity and diversity of foods are available to support adequate nutrition at
the household and city levels.
Personal and The practice of urban agriculture that has benefits to the entire local community,
Social beyond those directly involved in its application.
Well‐being The practice of urban agriculture that provides wider personal benefits beyond
employment and food such as self‐development, access to groups and networks and
other support structures
27 | P a g e

DPU Field Work 2009
Ashaiman Group
Theme Criteria

Governance Local authorities have the capacity to sustainably manage land, water and waste.
The land used for urban agriculture is secure either through land tenure or secure land
agreements.
Political, financial and institutional support by the state, both nationally and locally,
and local decision makers for urban agriculture.
Local decision makers recognise, support and incorporate urban agriculture into their
plans, policies and programmes.
Grassroots organisations are recognised and can influence policy and interventions.
Subsistence There are income opportunities from agriculture in an urban environment.
and Income There are peripheral income opportunities that serve to support sustainable farming
Opportunities practices, such as composting facilities.
Export of food crops is not at the expense of local food supply and income
opportunities.
Vulnerable groups are able to access opportunities to engage in urban agriculture.
Knowledge Farmers have easy access to education and training on safe farming techniques.
systems Farming practices incorporate both effective traditional farming systems and new
farming practices that are sustainable.
28 | P a g e

DPU Field Work 2009
Ashaiman Group
APPENDIX 2: SEMI‐STRUCTURED QUESTIONNAIRES (FARMERS EXAMPLE)
29 | P a g e

DPU Field Work 2009
Ashaiman Group
30 | P a g e

DPU Field Work 2009
Ashaiman Group
31 | P a g e

DPU Field Work 2009
Ashaiman Group
APPENDIX 3: FOCUS GROUP METHODOLOGY

In addition to semi‐structured interviews, the research team conducted 6 focus groups among women
and men farmers. Two separate activities were undertaken in the focus groups: a daily activity timeline
and a seasonal analysis of food, water, inputs and income availability. In total, 4 groups of farmers
completed the daily activity timeline (1 male and 1 female group per site), and 2 groups of farmers
completed the seasonal analysis activity (1 male group from each site).

The daily activity timeline consisted of asking farmers to map out a typical Monday of farm work in the
rainy season. The research team provided a basic layout of day and evening hours as well as some
typical working and household activity cards that might apply. Additional blank cards were provided so
that participants could add activities if desired. The participants were then asked, starting from the
morning, to place the activity cards in the time slots on the page.

GIDA site female farmers daily activity timeline focus group

The daily activity data from the male and female groups was then compared to assess differences in
gender roles and workload across the groups.

32 | P a g e

DPU Field Work 2009
Ashaiman Group
Example of Finished Women’s Daily Activity Timeline:

Morning Evening

The seasonal analysis activity consisted of asking farmers to rate the availability of food, water, and
income as well as the need to use fertilizers and pesticides across each month of the year. Further
information on the number of workers needed for farming tasks by season was collected,
distinguishing between those tasks that could be assisted by family members and those that required
hired labour. The research team provided a basic monthly calendar template with picture cards for the
different resources (food, water, income) and inputs (chemical fertilizers, compost, pesticides), and
farmers indicated the status of that resource or input by placing cards on each month. Harvest months
might show many income cards, for example, while other months had fewer or no income cards to
show lower income times of the year.

33 | P a g e

DPU Field Work 2009
Ashaiman Group

GIDA site male farmers seasonal analysis focus group

This seasonal analysis allowed the research team to discuss the main challenges faced across different
seasons in terms of resource availability, labour and inputs with the farmers. Since we visited the site
in the rainy season, this activity was essential to extending our understanding of farming practices and
framing our strategies to address the complete annual farming cycle.

Example of Finished Seasonal Analysis Activity:

34 | P a g e

DPU Field Work 2009
Ashaiman Group
APPENDIX 4: SCHEDULE OF RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

35 | P a g e

DPU Field Work 2009
Ashaiman Group

36 | P a g e

DPU Field Work 2009
Ashaiman Group
APPENDIX 5: DATA COMPILATION AND ANALYSIS

In order for the team to gain insight on farming practices and challenges farmers face, and to test the
feasibility of proposed interventions, a number of research questions were developed. They were
based on the extensive literature review conducted prior to the fieldwork. Different versions of each
question were written to target the particular stakeholder to be interviewed.

When all the questions were drafted, they were compiled into one master database and assigned
codes based on topics. There were over 350 combinations of questions and stakeholders in total.

The following is a snapshot of the question database:

Information Gap Interview Group Hypothesis Question Label Question Text
Working
Arrangements, Women Traders Gender GR1 How many hours per week do you work?
Gender Roles
Working
Arrangements, Men Farmers Gender GR3 How much time do you spend each day traveling to the plot?
Gender Roles
When you have a programme or information for the women
Women's Groups UN Habitat Gender GWG13
farmers, how do you reach them?
Ashaiman Since the change from Tema to Ashaiman, have there been any
GIDA General AT1
Transition changes in how the site is managed?
RWH Perceptions & Have you ever used collected rainwater as a source for watering
Women Farmers RWH RPR1
Practices your crops?
RWH Perceptions & Are there any rainwater collection systems on any of the GIDA
IWMI/AWGUPA RWH RPR11
Practices sites?
RWH Perceptions & Do you ever collect rainwater to use for your household needs?
Local Community RWH RPR10
Practices Do you know anyone who does?
Waste/Sanitation
Local Community Composting CWS4 Do you have a bin to put your household waste into?

Situation
Composting Do you know if there is any composting facility that available in
Men Farmers Composting CCF1
Facilities the site?
Composting
Women Farmers Composting CPE4 Have you ever used composting fertiliser?
Perceptions

The question database constantly evolved and was added to during the fieldtrip as more was learned
and the research needs changed.

Whenever a stakeholder interview or question and answer session was conducted, the database was
used as a starting point to extract the relevant questions.

In order to compile the data to facilitate analysis, the answers from each interview were entered into
one answer database. The database can be filtered by any criteria, including topic, stakeholder, or
specific question so that results can easily be compared. This also alerted the team during the fieldtrip
if there were any discrepancies between stakeholder perceptions that warranted further investigation.
37 | P a g e

DPU Field Work 2009
Ashaiman Group
The following is a snapshot of the answer database:

Respondent
Name (for DEMO2:
interviews GIDA/
with officials Type of DEMO1: Non DEMO3: DEMO5:
ID Interviewer only) Interview Gender GIDA Age Occupation GR4 GR5 GR8 GR9
JPWF1 Jenny GIDA Farmers Focus Female GIDA 3055 Farmer always Weeding, but farming is Okra, maize,
Cooperative Group Daily enough food children or hired primary, but rice are
Activities to feed your labour can help some prmary;
family; is a sometimes women take some grow
hobby she crops to vegetables
likes; is a market like
family sometimes tomatoes,
tradition peppers and
that's been onions
passed down
to us
JPMF1 Jenny Farmers Semi Male NonGIDA 65, farmer father was a cost of equipments farming. tomatoes,
Cooperative structured 36,38, farmer for farming, Wives take peppers
Roman Down group 37, 68, "farmer from repairing pumps crops from (augustend
interview 60 infancy" and pipes. Pumps farm and sell of year),
stable are expensive and them at the okra, corn
seasons(dry they have to change market (may
season, it every 34 years. august)
rainy Waste and plastics
season) disposed in gutters
access to and transformed
market and through the canal to
to sell the farms is a major
crops. problem for farmers.
EMF1 Erika Farmers Focus Male NonGIDA 3065 farmer lack of support from no other Maize and
Cooperative Group the government and source of okra
Roman Down Seasonal price flutuation due income
Analysis to offer and demand
for products in the
market each season
RMF1 Rieko GIDA Farmers Semi Male GIDA 50 Farmer farming the land allocation, Electrocity Rice, Maize,
Cooperative structured way to live it financeinterms of, Tomatoes,
group is fun to see water fee and Okra
interview vegetables buying inputs, such
growing as chemical fertiliser
and labour force

38 | P a g e

DPU Field Work 2009
Ashaiman Group
APPENDIX 6: IRRIGATION WATER SOURCES
39 | P a g e

DPU Field Work 2009
Ashaiman Group
APPENDIX 7: WATER STRATEGIES

Settlement Pond

A settlement pond improves the quality of water by temporarily increasing the space that the water
from a river flows into, causing the water to slow down. Slowing down the rate of flow or velocity of
the water causes it to drop the waste it is carrying (suspended load) to the bottom of the pond. The
water can then either be pumped directly out of the pond for irrigation or the water can re‐enter the
stream or river, increasing its rate of flow again and supplying cleaner water downstream. Further
information is available from the UK Drinking Water Inspectorate at http://www.dwi.gov.uk/ (last
accessed 30/05/09)

A Decanter Digester and an Anaerobic Filter

Spillway

The vessel on the left is the Decanter
Digester and the vessel on the right is
the Anaerobic Filter (Bodard, 1996 pp.
Arial view of a network of decanter digesters 21‐22)
and anaerobic filters (Bodard, 1996 pp. 21‐22)
40 | P a g e

DPU Field Work 2009
Ashaiman Group
Sanitation waste flows from individual households into a community based Decanter Digester. One
Decanter Digester can serve 30 homes, and takes up 3m across by 2m deep. Once the sanitation waste
enters the Decanter Digester, organic material settles to the bottom of the vessel, which then acts as a
digester. Water pressure then forces water to flow in a small pipe from the digester into the Anaerobic
Filter. In the Anaerobic Filter, the water is forces through a network of small stones, which further
purifies the water. The water is forced up through the vessel, where it can then enter a drain. This
process purifies the waste water and makes it suitable for entering a drain system.

Source: Bodard, P. (1996) A Agua e saneamento no Nordeste do Brasi: Estudos de Casol. GRET Urbano
Brasil. PSEou, France, pp. 21‐22.

Spillway

A spillway is a structure that operates, via gravity, by releasing excess water from a dam to prevent
overtopping or flooding during times when high volumes of water enter the dam’s reservoir. More
information is available at the British Dams Website:
http://www.britishdams.org/about_dams/overflow.htm (last accessed 30/05/09)

41 | P a g e

Towards A Model of Sustainable Urban Agriculture: A Case Study of Ashaiman, Accra

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Towards A Model of Sustainable Urban Agriculture: A Case Study of Ashaiman, Accra

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

MSc Environment & Sustainable Development

You might also like