Where Is the GHS 100 Million? Ghana Peasant Farmers Demand Transparency on Delayed NAFCO Grain Purchases

Introduction

In Ghana’s agricultural sector, the allocation of GHS 100 million to the National Food Buffer Stock Company (NAFCO) promised relief for peasant farmers struggling with surplus grains like maize and rice. Intended to stabilize food prices and support farmers’ offloading of excess produce, the funds have sparked controversy due to apparent delays in implementation. The Peasant Farmers Association of Ghana (PFAG) is leading calls for accountability, highlighting a lack of visible purchases months after the announcement. This article explores the concerns surrounding the GHS 100 million buffer stock initiative, its implications for Ghanaian farmers, and the need for transparency in grain procurement processes.

Background on NAFCO and Buffer Stock Systems

NAFCO, established under Ghana’s food security framework, operates as a buffer stock mechanism to purchase surplus grains during harvest seasons. This prevents price crashes that harm smallholder farmers, who produce over 80% of Ghana’s food crops, according to the Ministry of Food and Agriculture (MoFA). By buying maize, rice, and other staples, NAFCO aims to release stocks during shortages, ensuring price stability—a critical tool in a country where agriculture employs nearly half the workforce.

Analysis

The core issue revolves around the absence of tangible evidence that the GHS 100 million reached peasant farmers directly. PFAG Executive Director Bismark Owusu Nortey has publicly stated that no records exist of farmers selling produce to NAFCO, despite announcements of the funds’ release. While NAFCO has reportedly purchased some rice—evidenced by labeled sacks in photos—the sourcing remains unclear. This opacity raises questions about procurement routes, beneficiary districts, and fund utilization in the delayed NAFCO grain purchases.

Farmer Impacts and Market Dynamics

Ghana’s peasant farmers, often operating on less than 2 hectares, face post-harvest losses exceeding 30% due to poor storage and market access, per FAO data. Surplus grains flood markets during peaks, depressing prices to as low as GHS 20 per 100kg bag of maize. The buffer stock was meant to intervene here, but delays exacerbate financial strain, forcing distress sales or spoilage. Nortey’s concerns underscore a systemic gap: without direct farmer linkages, initiatives fail to build trust or achieve food price stabilization goals.

Transparency Gaps in Procurement

Available information suggests NAFCO engaged aggregators or millers, but no public list details contracts, quantities, or locations. This lack of disclosure contrasts with best practices in buffer stock operations, where traceability ensures equitable distribution. PFAG’s push for published aggregator lists aligns with global standards, such as those from the World Bank’s agricultural risk management programs.

Summary

The Peasant Farmers Association of Ghana questions the GHS 100 million allocated to NAFCO for surplus grain purchases, citing no direct benefits to farmers despite months of delay. Executive Director Bismark Owusu Nortey calls for clarity on rice sourcing, contract awards, and district coverage. While commending the initiative, PFAG demands timelines, transparency, and intensified mop-up efforts to protect smallholders and stabilize prices. Enhanced communication could restore confidence in government agricultural interventions.

Key Points

Practical Advice

For peasant farmers navigating NAFCO grain purchases, proactive steps can improve engagement. First, register with local MoFA district offices or PFAG chapters to access verified aggregator lists when published. Monitor NAFCO announcements via official channels like their website or social media for purchase windows.

Steps for Farmers to Sell Surplus Grains

1. Prepare Produce: Dry grains to 14% moisture content to meet NAFCO standards, reducing losses.
2. Form Groups: Join farmer-based organizations (FBOs) for bulk sales, negotiating better prices.
3. Track Opportunities: Use MoFA’s Farmer Line (0800 123 456) or PFAG hotlines for updates on buffer stock mop-ups.
4. Document Sales: Retain receipts for any transactions to claim subsidies or loans.
5. Alternative Markets: Explore private millers or export cooperatives if NAFCO delays persist.

Advice for Policymakers and NAFCO

Implement digital dashboards for real-time procurement tracking, similar to Kenya’s National Cereals and Produce Board. Conduct quarterly farmer forums to align initiatives with on-ground needs, fostering trust in Ghana’s buffer stock system.

Points of Caution

While buffer stocks offer promise, pitfalls abound in Ghana farmer surplus grain management. Lack of storage infrastructure leads to quality deterioration, disqualifying produce from NAFCO. Farmers risk debt from informal lenders during delays. Over-reliance on government programs without diversified markets exposes vulnerabilities to policy shifts. Additionally, unverified aggregators may underpay or delay settlements, eroding benefits. Always verify contracts and avoid sales without written agreements.

Risks of Delayed Purchases

Prolonged delays contribute to 20-30% post-harvest losses, per IFPRI studies on Ghana, amplifying food insecurity. Without transparency, funds may favor larger players, sidelining peasant farmers who need support most.

Comparison

Ghana’s NAFCO experience mirrors challenges in other African buffer stock programs but highlights unique gaps. In contrast to Zambia’s Food Reserve Agency (FRA), which publishes monthly purchase reports and achieves 70% smallholder coverage, NAFCO’s opacity limits reach. Ethiopia’s Emergency Food Security Reserve mandates district-level quotas, ensuring rural inclusion— a model PFAG advocates.

NAFCO vs. Regional Peers

Adopting peer best practices could enhance NAFCO’s efficacy in Ghana agriculture buffer stock operations.

Legal Implications

Ghana’s Public Procurement Act (Act 663, as amended) mandates transparency in public fund usage, requiring competitive bidding and public disclosure of contracts above certain thresholds. NAFCO, as a state-owned entity, must comply, with non-disclosure risking audits by the Public Procurement Authority (PPA). The Right to Information Act (2019) empowers citizens, including PFAG, to request procurement details. Failure to respond could invite legal challenges, emphasizing accountability in grain purchase delays. Farmers can file formal requests via PPA portals for verifiable data.

Conclusion

The GHS 100 million NAFCO saga underscores the urgency for transparent, timely grain procurement in Ghana. PFAG’s advocacy amplifies peasant farmers’ voices, pushing for mechanisms that deliver real support. By publishing aggregator lists, setting disbursement timelines, and boosting communication, NAFCO can fulfill its mandate, stabilize prices, and empower smallholders. Stronger accountability will not only resolve current delayed grain purchases concerns but also pave the way for resilient agricultural policies, benefiting Ghana’s food security long-term.

FAQ